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

The annotations provide robust operational guarantees (ReadOnly, DestructiveHint=false). The description successfully supplements this by specifying the content of the output, listing the four key attributes ('licence, latest run, age, status'), which is valuable content context for the agent.

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 a single, concise sentence that directly lists the key information being provided. It avoids unnecessary filler while still attempting to define the scope of the data.

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?

While it adequately describes the contents of the return value (the attributes), it is slightly incomplete because it fails to specify that the tool *retrieves* or *lists* these sources, which is the necessary action.

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 input schema is empty, resulting in 0 parameters. With 100% coverage and no input parameters to describe, the description is merely at the baseline score for parameter semantics.

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 informs the user about the attributes available ('licence, latest run, age, status') but lacks a specific action verb combined with the resource, making the purpose somewhat vague. It doesn't clearly state that the tool retrieves or lists these sources.

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?

Since there are no parameters and no alternative tools are mentioned in the context that this tool should compete against, there is zero guidance on when to invoke this tool versus its sibling tools.

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