Delete Sitemap

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it discloses nothing beyond the bare action. It does not state that deletion is irreversible, whether the sitemap must first exist, whether the property permission level matters, or what happens on a nonexistent sitemap. For an unannotated destructive mutation this is a significant gap.

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?

A single short sentence with zero filler, and the action verb is front-loaded. Nothing is padded or repeated.

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 not be explained, but the description is still incomplete for a destructive, unannotated tool. It should at minimum state irreversibility and any preconditions for deletion; as written, the agent learns nothing it could not already infer from the tool name and schema.

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%; both site_url (property identifier) and feedpath (full URL of the sitemap) are documented in the schema itself. The description adds no syntax, format, or example detail beyond that, 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?

The description states a specific verb (Delete) and resource (a sitemap from Search Console), so an agent can immediately tell what the tool does. However, it makes no attempt to distinguish itself from siblings such as submit_sitemap, submit_sitemaps, or get_sitemap, so differentiation is left to inference.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no precondition stating the sitemap must already be registered, and no mention of authorization requirements. The agent must infer that this is the inverse of submit_sitemap purely from the name.

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