Get sitemap details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It explicitly says 'get', indicating a read operation, which is a basic behavioral trait. However, it does not disclose error handling, prerequisites, or return format, leaving some gaps.

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 concise sentence that directly states the tool's function. No unnecessary words or repetition of the tool name; it earns its place.

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?

The tool has no output schema, no annotations, and the description does not explain what 'details and status' specifically include. It also lacks behavior context like what happens if the sitemap does not exist. Given the vague wording, the description is insufficient for a fully informed agent.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters (siteUrl and feedpath), each with clear definitions. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so the baseline 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?

The description clearly states the tool gets details and status for a single sitemap, using the specific verb 'get' and resource 'single sitemap'. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_sitemaps (plural) and submit_sitemap.

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?

The description conveys that this is for a single sitemap, implying you should know the specific sitemap URL. While it does not explicitly mention alternatives like list_sitemaps, the context is clear enough that an agent would know when to use this tool versus listing all sitemaps.

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