gsc_delete_sitemap

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

No annotations exist, so description must provide behavioral context. The 're-submittable' tag indicates non-permanence, but lacks details on authorization, rate limits, or side effects like cache invalidation.

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?

Single sentence with front-loaded label 'GSC [WRITE]'. All words carry weight; no fluff. Ideal for quick scanning.

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?

Adequate for a simple delete operation, but lacks information on error handling, required permissions, or confirmatory feedback. Given no output schema and no annotations, more context would be helpful.

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 describes 'feedpath' as full URL, but 'siteUrl' has no description. The tool description does not add meaning beyond the schema for 'feedpath' and leaves 'siteUrl' ambiguous. With 50% schema coverage, more param info is needed.

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?

Description clearly states it removes a sitemap and is a write operation. The phrase 're-submittable' distinguishes it from irreversible deletions, and sibling tools like gsc_submit_sitemap and gsc_list_sitemaps make the purpose distinct.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The note 're-submittable' implies undoing is possible, but there's no mention of prerequisites or comparison to sibling tools.

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