List Sources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does note that filtering and pagination are supported, but says nothing about read-only safety, default page size (50, per schema), ordering, or how page_token behaves once exhausted.

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 compact sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than genuinely concise — brevity here comes at the cost of the guidance an agent needs.

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. However, for a 4-parameter listing tool with zero schema documentation, no annotations, and an ambiguous sibling (list_all_sources), the description is far too thin to let an agent invoke it 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% across all 4 parameters, so the description must compensate. It only alludes to 'filter' and 'pagination', leaving filter_str syntax, page_size semantics, page_token format, and the opaque _meta parameter entirely unexplained.

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 the verb and resource ('List sources'), which is clear enough on its own, but it fails to distinguish this tool from the sibling list_all_sources or explain what 'sources' scopes to. The 'optional filter and pagination' clause is generic and adds no differentiating detail.

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 guidance on when to use this versus list_all_sources or get_source/get_all_sources. The word 'optional' hints the filter can be omitted but does not say what happens when it is, or when the agent should prefer this tool.

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