Parse a sitemap

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

Without annotations, the description must carry the burden, and it does cover the core behavior: fetching a sitemap and returning count, sample, and nested sitemaps. However, it omits details like error handling, response size limits, or whether it follows redirects, which are relevant for a networked fetch operation.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the action ('Fetch') and the key return elements. No redundant words or fluffy content.

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 lack of output schema, the description adequately summarizes the return values. It mentions URL count, sample entries with lastmod, and nested sitemaps. However, it could be more explicit about error conditions and the exact structure of the sample, but for a simple tool this is nearly complete.

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%, and the description does not mention the parameters. 'sitemapUrl' is only inferred from 'Fetch a sitemap.xml or sitemap index', while 'sampleSize' is entirely absent. The description adds no meaning beyond the parameter names.

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 uses specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'sitemap.xml or sitemap index', clearly stating what it does. It distinguishes from siblings by focusing on sitemap-specific details (URL count, sample entries with lastmod, nested sitemaps), unlike extract_links or check_robots.

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?

Usage is implied rather than explicit: the description indicates when to use it (to parse a sitemap) but does not mention alternatives or exclusions. No reference to sibling tools like extract_links or check_robots, so the agent must infer context from the name.

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