get_sitemaps

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

There are no annotations, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states that it returns a list with 'status and details,' but omits whether it is a safe read-only operation, requires specific permissions, or has pagination or limits. The return format is mentioned but not deepened with context like what statuses exist or what 'configured site' means.

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?

The description is concise, with a clear purpose statement and a separate 'Returns' line. Every sentence earns its place, there is no redundancy, and the structure helps the agent quickly grasp the tool's function and output.

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 no-parameter tool, the description is adequate but leaves ambiguity. 'Configured site' is undefined, and 'status and details' is vague without an output schema. It covers the basic return type but not enough to fully predict the output structure or edge cases.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description adds context by referencing 'the configured site,' implying an external configuration rather than a parameter, which is useful. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description does not detract.

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 clearly states the action: 'Get all sitemaps for the configured site.' It identifies the resource (sitemaps), the verb (get all), and scope (configured site). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_sitemap and submit_sitemap, which perform different operations.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention that this is appropriate for inspecting sitemaps before deletion or submission, nor does it exclude scenarios. There is no explicit 'when to use' or 'when not to use' context.

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