gsc_list_sitemaps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal context ('submitted') but does not disclose pagination, limits, or the meaning of the sitemapIndex parameter. Overall, it provides some value beyond annotations but is not rich.

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 a single, clear, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. It efficiently communicates the tool's function.

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?

While the tool is simple and annotations provide safety context, the description is minimal. There is no output schema, so the agent cannot anticipate the response structure. The optional sitemapIndex parameter is not explained, and the description does not clarify whether the result includes sitemap index children or other details. It is adequate but has clear gaps.

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 50%: siteUrl is documented in the schema, but sitemapIndex is not. The tool description does not describe any parameters or clarify the purpose of sitemapIndex, leaving the agent without meaningful additional context 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('sitemaps') with a clear scope ('for a Search Console property'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'gsc_get_sitemap' (singular) and query tools by focusing on listing submitted sitemaps.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like gsc_get_sitemap or query tools. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or scenarios where a different tool would be more appropriate.

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