fi_energy_list_sources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the shape of the returned content (counts, provenance URLs, refresh dates), which implies a read-only catalog operation, but it never explicitly states that it is read-only, whether it is paginated, or how large the result can be.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every clause contributes: the resource, the record-count dimension, provenance, and freshness.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description must convey return content, and it does so by naming the three key fields. For a zero-parameter read-only listing tool this is nearly complete; only pagination/ordering behavior is unspecified.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline of 4 applies.

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 (data sources) and names the value of the result (record counts, provenance URLs, refresh dates). It is distinguishable from the regulation/grid-code/decision retrieval siblings, but does not explicitly contrast itself with the closest sibling, fi_energy_check_data_freshness.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this is a discovery/catalog call, but the description never says when to call it instead of a search tool or fi_energy_check_data_freshness. No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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