delete_sitemap

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and readOnlyHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds high-value context beyond them: the required write-enable flag and the crucial clarification that 'The file itself is untouched' — directly countering the intuition that a destructive delete removes the file.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, front-loading the action and immediately following with the two facts an agent most needs (the env flag and the file-safe behavior).

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the write prerequisite plus the 'file untouched' clarification cover the key behavioral risks for a destructive tool. Only the parameter meanings remain unaddressed.

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 description coverage is 0% for two required parameters (site_url, sitemap_url), and the description supplies no meaning for either — no format, no distinction between the property and the sitemap. It fails to compensate for the coverage gap, though the names are largely self-describing.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Remove a sitemap from Search Console'), which cleanly distinguishes it from siblings like submit_sitemap, list_sitemaps, and get_sitemap. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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?

Provides the non-obvious precondition that GSC_ALLOW_WRITE=1 must be set, which is real usage guidance. It does not, however, contrast with alternatives (e.g., why delete vs. just stop submitting) or state when-not-to-use.

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