gsc_sitemap_submit

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden for behavioral context. It fails to mention authentication requirements, whether the sitemap must be valid, or if submission overwrites existing sitemaps. Only states the basic action.

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?

Extremely brief at 5 words, but lacks key information that would justify its conciseness. Every sentence should earn its place, but here the single phrase does not fully inform the agent. Could be more efficient with more content.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and lack of output schema, the description should provide more context about expected outcomes, error conditions, or relationship to sibling tools. It is insufficient for an agent to use effectively without additional knowledge.

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 clear descriptions for both parameters. The tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 the tool submits a sitemap to Search Console. It uses specific verb 'submit' and resource 'sitemap', distinguishing it from sibling tools like gsc_sitemap_get or gsc_sitemap_delete.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is idx_url_submit for URL indexing, but no differentiation provided. No context on prerequisites or timing.

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