List Sources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the description need not restate safety. It adds value by specifying the return fields (name, url, doc_count, last_updated) and the relationship to search_docs.

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?

Four short sentences cover purpose, use case, sibling relationship, and return format without redundancy. Front-loaded with the core action.

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 simple read-only list operation, the description is complete: it states what is listed, how to use it, what it returns, and how it relates to search_docs. Output schema exists, so no need to detail every field.

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?

There are zero parameters and the empty input schema fully covers them, meeting the baseline of 4. The description's mention that sources can be used to filter search_docs indirectly clarifies parameter context.

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 opens with 'List all configured documentation sources with their statistics,' a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes from siblings by focusing on enumeration and discovery, and explicitly links source names to search_docs filtering.

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?

'Use this to discover what documentation sources are available for searching' provides direct usage context. It also notes the names can filter search_docs results, but does not explicitly contrast with refresh_sources or other alternatives.

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