queue_from_sitemaps

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description usefully adds that it fetches over the network (including nested indexes and .gz) and records per-URL sitemap provenance. It omits key behavioral facts for a state-mutating tool: whether the queue is replaced or appended, deduplication of already-queued URLs, and what happens when max_urls truncates the set.

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?

One dense sentence with the action and the provenance behavior front-loaded; no filler to remove.

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?

For a three-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers what it consumes and what it produces (a queued URL set with sitemap attribution). The remaining gap is queue semantics (replace vs append) and the downstream inspection step.

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 67%, with 'site' and 'sitemap_url' (including the 'default = every sitemap submitted in Search Console' behavior) already documented in the schema. The description adds no meaning for 'max_urls', which has no schema description and is the parameter most likely to cause surprise truncation given the claim of queuing 'every page URL'.

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?

Uses specific verbs and resources ('Download sitemaps (indexes, .gz) and queue every page URL for inspection'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It never names a sibling (queue_urls, queue_from_performance, list_sitemaps) to contrast against, so sibling differentiation is left to inference.

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 phrase 'queue every page URL for inspection' implies this is the seeding step before run_inspections, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not guidance is given. Nothing tells the agent whether to pick this over queue_urls or queue_from_performance.

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