get_sourcesList available lead sources to assign when creating jobs, estimates, or customers. Values are cached for 30 minutes.
List all available lead sources. Use these values when creating jobs, estimates, or customers. Cached 30 minutes.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds the useful behavioral detail that results are 'Cached 30 minutes,' which is not captured by the annotations. The annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the additional cache disclosure adds meaningful context beyond the structured metadata.
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 two short sentences with no filler. The primary purpose is front-loaded, followed by the usage note and cache behavior, making every word valuable.
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 listing tool, the description covers purpose, usage context, and caching behavior. Annotations cover safety and idempotency, so nothing critical is missing for an agent to call this tool correctly.
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 and the schema description coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter semantics burden on the description. The baseline for a zero-parameter tool is appropriate here.
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 clearly states 'List all available lead sources' with a specific verb and resource. It also explains that these values are used when creating jobs, estimates, or customers, which helps distinguish it from sibling enumeration tools like get_job_categories or get_payment_types.
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 gives concrete context on when to use the tool: 'Use these values when creating jobs, estimates, or customers.' It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the usage context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.