google-search-console-mcp

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

Remove a sitemap

delete_sitemap

DestructiveIdempotent

Remove a sitemap from a Search Console property. First call returns a confirmation token, then call again with the token to confirm deletion.

Instructions

Removes a sitemap from the property. Two-step: the first call returns a confirmation token, the second performs the removal.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description
`feedpath`	Yes	The full URL of the sitemap to remove
`site_url`	Yes	The Search Console property: "sc-domain:example.com" for a domain property, or "https://example.com/" for a URL-prefix property (the trailing slash is required)
`confirm_token`	No	The token from this tool's previous refusal. Call without it first to see what would happen and receive the token; it cannot be guessed or reused.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`site`	Yes
`removed`	Yes
`feedpath`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed3 schema fields changedv0.3.0Sep 8, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / confirm_token / maxLength
```
Added value: +64
```
- addedInput schema / properties / feedpath / maxLength
```
Added value: +2048
```
- addedInput schema / properties / site_url / maxLength
```
Added value: +2048
```
First observedv0.2.0Sep 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.4/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Beyond the annotations (destructiveHint), the description discloses important behavioral details: the confirmation token mechanism, the need to call without the token first, and that the token cannot be guessed or reused. This is significant behavioral information not captured in the annotations.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

The description is concise, with two sentences that front-load the primary action and then explain the flow. No unnecessary words or redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

The description explains the two-step token flow, which is critical for correct usage. It does not mention error cases or permissions, but the output schema exists and annotations cover destructive behavior. The essential context for an agent to use the tool is present.

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

Parameters3/5

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

The input schema descriptions fully cover all three parameters (feedpath, site_url, confirm_token) with clear meanings. The description adds no extra parameter-level detail beyond what is already in the schema, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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

Purpose5/5

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

The description clearly states the tool's action: 'Removes a sitemap from the property.' It uses a specific verb ('Removes') and resource ('sitemap'), and distinguishes it from sibling tools that delete sites or manage verifications. The two-step nature is also mentioned, adding clarity.

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

Usage Guidelines4/5

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

The description provides explicit guidance on the two-step process: first call returns a confirmation token, second performs the removal. This is a practical usage instruction. However, it does not explicitly compare to alternatives (e.g., when to use delete_sitemap vs delete_site), but the purpose is clear enough.

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