List VIPMP docs sitemap

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that the result is the full sitemap and can be used for browsing or path discovery, but says little about output size, pagination, or other operational behavior. This is adequate but 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 two sentences with no filler. The key action (returning the full sitemap) is front-loaded, and the follow-up sentence adds immediate practical use.

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?

This is a zero-parameter, read-only tool with an output schema, so the description fully covers what an agent needs to select and invoke it correctly. The purpose and use cases are stated clearly, and no additional prerequisites or edge-case warnings are needed.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema has 100% coverage, so parameter documentation is unnecessary. The baseline of 4 applies because no parameter semantics are needed.

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 returns the full sitemap of Adobe VIP Marketplace API documentation, which is a specific resource and action. This distinguishes it from search_vipmp_docs, get_vipmp_page, and list_vipmp_endpoints by emphasizing the complete sitemap rather than individual pages or endpoint details.

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 provides a clear use case: browse all topics or find exact page paths. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use this tool, but the stated purpose is enough to guide selection among the siblings.

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