Get Source

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, and it discloses nothing beyond the bare purpose. It does not state whether the source must exist, what happens on a missing/invalid ID, or any permission requirements.

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 waste. It is efficient, though the brevity edges toward under-specification rather than tightness.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and this is a simple single-lookup read. However, with zero annotation coverage and zero parameter documentation, the definition leaves basic invocation semantics (valid ID form, not-found behavior) unaddressed.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description adds almost nothing: 'by ID' maps loosely to source_id, but the _meta parameter is undocumented in both schema and description. No ID format, type, or provenance guidance is given.

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 (Get) and resource (source) with scope (single, by ID). It is clearly distinguishable from the list-oriented siblings in intent, though it does not explicitly name list_sources or get_all_sources as the alternatives.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no mention of the sibling tools (list_sources, get_all_sources) that an agent must choose between. The reader must infer that this is the ID-based retrieval path.

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