Submit a sitemap

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

Adds value beyond annotations by explaining that resubmission is a safe nudge, that the sitemap must already be reachable, and that no data is returned on success. It also directs the caller to get_sitemap for status, which is useful behavioral context not present 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.

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

Three focused sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and each sentence contributes essential information: what the tool does, when resubmission is useful, prerequisites, and expected return 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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: prerequisites, behavior, and follow-up action. It even preempts confusion about the empty response by telling the agent to check get_sitemap afterward.

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 coverage is 100% with strong parameter descriptions containing examples and format guidance. The description adds further meaning by specifying that the sitemap must be reachable and must live under the property, which clarifies feedpath requirements beyond the schema.

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 action (submit or resubmit), the resource (sitemap), and the target context (a property). It clearly differentiates from siblings like get_sitemap, list_sitemaps, and delete_sitemap by naming the operation and its resubmission role.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use it, including resubmitting after content changes and the prerequisites that the sitemap must be reachable and under the property. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives like list_sitemaps or get_sitemap, but the guidance is sufficient for correct selection.

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