Fetch a paginated list of submitted sitemaps for a specific host, using a cursor to navigate large result sets.
Read one page of submitted sitemaps with an exclusive identifier cursor.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | ||
| cursor | No | ||
| host_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful pagination context ('one page', 'exclusive identifier cursor'), but does not explain cursor semantics, auth requirements, or what host scope means, leaving behavioral context thin beyond what annotations provide.
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?
A single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is efficient, though its brevity is partly why parameter and usage detail are absent.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. Yet with a fully undocumented parameter set and no usage routing, the definition is only minimally complete for a paginated list 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?
Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description carries the parameter burden. It mentions the cursor ('exclusive identifier cursor') but says nothing about host_id (required) or limit (default 100), leaving two of three parameters undocumented in both schema and description.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Read one page of submitted sitemaps'), which an agent can understand without opening the schema. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling webmaster_list_sitemaps, which likely returns a similar resource, so the distinguishing scope is left implicit.
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?
Provides no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as webmaster_list_sitemaps or webmaster_get_sitemap. The mention of 'one page' implies a paginated list but does not say when to prefer this over others.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.