french_school_map_get_sources

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool lists curated sources but doesn't disclose what the output looks like (e.g., source names, formats, whether it's a simple array or structured with metadata). It also doesn't mention if this is a read-only operation, though 'list' implies non-mutating.

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?

One-sentence description, front-loaded with the verb. Zero waste. Perfectly concise for a simple tool.

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 tool, this is nearly complete. The description tells the agent what it returns (sources). Potential gap: it doesn't say the format or structure of the sources, but given there's no output schema, the agent might benefit from a hint. However, for simplicity and given the sibling context, it scores high.

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 has zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain parameters. The schema is empty. The description adds value by explaining what the tool returns. Default for zero-param tools is typically 4 since there's nothing to compensate for.

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 states a clear purpose: list curated sources used by this MCP. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (sources). It distinguishes from siblings that fetch excerpts, search, or provide context.

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 this is a discovery tool for the agent to learn what sources are available. It doesn't explicitly say when to use it versus siblings, but given the sibling names it's reasonably clear this is for listing available data sources. No alternatives mentioned.

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