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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a safe read, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds the underlying endpoint (GET /sources) and concrete source types, but says nothing about pagination defaults, result ordering, or what a caller gets back; for a simple list tool with annotations, this is adequate but thin.

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?

Two short sentences, purpose front-loaded, no filler. The trailing endpoint reference ('Census: GET /sources.') is marginally useful for tracing the API but does not serve tool selection.

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?

For a zero-required-parameter read-only list operation with a fully documented schema and annotation coverage, this is close to sufficient. The only missing element is any hint about pagination behavior or result volume, which the absence of an output schema makes slightly more relevant.

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 100% — both page and per_page are documented in the schema with their purpose — so the description carries no obligation here. It adds no syntax or default-value detail beyond the schema, which is the baseline case.

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 (List) and resource (configured data warehouse sources) and enumerates concrete source types (Snowflake, BigQuery, Redshift, Databricks), which makes it distinguishable from census_get_source and census_list_destinations. It does not explicitly name a sibling, but the singular/plural contrast with get_source is clear.

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 contains no when-to-use statement, no prerequisites, and no named alternative. An agent must infer that this is for enumerating all sources rather than fetching one (census_get_source) or listing destinations; nothing in the text routes it.

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