streamlabs_list_sources

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

The description clearly indicates this is a read-only list operation, which is the primary behavioral trait. However, with no annotations provided, it does not add any extra context (e.g., whether the list is paginated, whether it includes hidden sources, or return format specifics). It is sufficient for a simple list but lacks depth.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and scope.

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-parameter, read-only list tool, the description is adequate. It clearly states what is listed and the context (Streamlabs Desktop). It could mention return format or differences from similar list tools, but these are minor gaps given the simplicity.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters, so there is nothing to explain. The description correctly describes the tool's purpose without parameter ambiguity. Baseline of 4 applies because 0 params means no parameter documentation 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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('all sources') with examples (cameras, capture devices, audio inputs), and scopes it to 'configured in Streamlabs Desktop.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like streamlabs_list_scenes (scenes) and streamlabs_list_available_source_types (available types), though it doesn't explicitly name them.

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 implies usage when you need an overview of all configured sources, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool. Given the existence of streamlabs_list_audio_sources and streamlabs_list_all_audio_sources, more explicit guidance on which to choose would be helpful.

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