search_console_sitemaps_list

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only nature, exact output structure, and prerequisite (verified property with access). Missing potential details like rate limits or pagination, but the output is clearly described as the full list.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is well-structured with the purpose upfront, followed by a structured breakdown of the return array. Every sentence provides value, and the format is clear without unnecessary fluff.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the single parameter and no output schema, the description is thorough. It details the output structure and distinguishes from related tools. Could mention pagination behavior or list size limits, but for a simple list tool it is adequate.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with a detailed site_url description. The description adds context about required authentication and proper formatting (trailing slash, sc-domain prefix), going beyond the schema baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists every sitemap registered against a Search Console property, including crawl status. It specifies the return format as a raw array with detailed fields, and distinguishes from the sibling tool for submitting sitemaps.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly states it is read-only and directs the user to search_console_sitemaps_submit for submitting or resubmitting sitemaps, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with an alternative.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.