map_site

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does state a key trait—no content crawling—which signals a lighter, read-only style operation. But it omits other behaviors such as rate limiting, pagination, or how sitemap_only affects the request, leaving gaps in what the agent can anticipate.

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, compact sentence that is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every word serves a function, and there is no filler or repetition. It is excellently concise for what it conveys.

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 a simple 2-parameter schema and an output schema, but the description leaves one parameter unexplained and gives no comparative guidance against siblings. While the core purpose is clear, the missing parameter semantics and limited behavioral detail make it incomplete for an agent to fully leverage the tool.

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 schema has 0% description coverage, and the description provides zero explanation of the parameters. While 'url' is self-explanatory, 'sitemap_only' is entirely unexplained, and the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation. The agent would have to guess the semantics of a key boolean parameter.

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 discovers all URLs of a website and explicitly notes it does not crawl content, which distinguishes it from the sibling tool crawl_site. The verb+resource combination is specific and immediately understandable.

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 phrase 'does not crawl content' implies this tool is for pure URL discovery rather than deep crawling, giving a hint about when to use it. However, no explicit alternatives are named, and there is no guidance on when to use this versus other siblings like diagnose_site or crawl_site.

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