Delete a sitemap

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

Annotations already mark this destructive and idempotent, but the description adds non-obvious behavioral facts the agent could not derive from them: Google may still retain the URLs and the sitemap file on disk is untouched. It also flags the required user confirmation, which goes beyond the annotation hints.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the action and followed by the two facts an agent actually needs. No filler or restatement of the tool name.

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 schema fully covers the two parameters. The description supplies the remaining operational context (scope of deletion, confirmation requirement) for a destructive tool.

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 100% and both parameters (site_url, sitemap_url) are already documented with format examples in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 separates it from the sibling read/submit tools (list_sitemaps, get_sitemap, submit_sitemap). The added clause about what removal does and does not mean sharpens the purpose further.

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?

Explicitly instructs 'Confirm with the user first,' which is meaningful guidance for a destructive operation. It stops short of naming a when-not condition or an alternative path (e.g., when to leave an outdated sitemap alone), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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