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

No annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral burden and does so well: it discloses what is returned (connection status and record counts), that Shopify is always connected, and that non-connected sources yield empty results. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Front-loads the imperative 'CALL THIS FIRST', then details what is returned, then gives the usage rationale. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy, and the structure flows logically.

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 the tool's role as a discovery/capabilities endpoint, the description is complete: it lists all expected sources, explains the meaning of 'not_connected', and states the impact on subsequent queries. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently conveys return content.

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?

Only one parameter (_offset) with 100% schema description coverage that fully explains pagination behavior, including the trigger condition (_pagination.hasMore). The description appropriately omits parameter details since the schema is self-sufficient.

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?

Names a specific verb+resource (get data sources) and enumerates the exact sources returned (Shopify, Triple Whale, Klaviyo, etc.). Distinguishes itself from all 50+ siblings by being the only sources/capabilities-listing tool.

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?

Explicitly states 'CALL THIS FIRST' and 'Use this to understand what data is available before making other queries', providing a clear when-to-use directive. It also gives the consequence of ignoring it: tools for non-connected sources return empty results.

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