Submit a sitemap URL to Bing Webmaster Tools for your site. Index your sitemap to enable Bing to crawl and discover your pages.
Submit a sitemap to Bing Webmaster Tools
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| siteUrl | Yes | The URL of the site | |
| sitemapUrl | Yes | The URL of the sitemap file |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, and the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or side effects like overwriting existing sitemaps.
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—one sentence that communicates the core action. However, it could benefit from additional structure (e.g., bullet points for context).
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?
Given no annotations or output schema and many sibling tools, the description is too minimal. It lacks information about return values, success/failure indicators, or typical use 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?
Schema coverage is 100% with basic parameter descriptions. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides.
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 and resource: 'Submit a sitemap to Bing Webmaster Tools'. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying Bing, but lacks differentiation from 'sitemaps_submit'.
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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'sitemaps_submit' or 'bing_url_submit'. No prerequisites or context provided.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.