list_sitemaps_enhanced

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of explaining behavior. It discloses the kind of information returned (errors, warnings, type, counts) and the optional child-listing behavior when sitemapIndex is provided. It does not mention error handling or response format, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 concise and well-structured, consisting of two clear sentences without any redundant or promotional content. It efficiently conveys the primary function and the optional parameter 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?

The description provides sufficient context for the tool's expected output (detailed sitemap information with specific fields) and the optional child-listing mode. It does not describe pagination, error cases, or the exact shape of the response, but given the absence of an output schema, it is reasonably complete for most use cases.

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?

Both parameters are fully described in the schema with clear semantics. The tool description adds minimal additional context beyond referencing the optional sitemapIndex parameter, so it does not significantly enhance the schema's already comprehensive parameter information.

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's purpose: to list detailed sitemap information including errors, warnings, type, and per-content-type counts, with an optional child-listing capability. It is distinct from sibling tools like get_sitemaps and manage_sitemaps, which are simpler or management-oriented.

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 implies usage for obtaining more detailed sitemap data than the basic get_sitemaps, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings. The optional child-listing behavior is mentioned, but there is no direct guidance on when not to use it or alternatives.

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