List Website Sources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds valuable behavioral context: the empty-list behavior when nothing has been crawled, the auth-mode-dependent behavior of appId (ignored in app-token mode), and the downstream consumer tools. It does not contradict annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core purpose is in the first sentence, followed by downstream consumers, then requirements/auth/errors. Every sentence earns its place, and the error conditions are packed efficiently.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, prerequisites, auth modes, error cases, and downstream usage. The output schema is absent, but the description states exactly what fields are returned (id, URL, RAG tags), so an agent has everything needed to call 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 coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the appId parameter. The description adds meaningful context beyond the schema by explaining when appId is required (B2B mode) versus ignored (app-token mode), and that it can be inherited from ethora-app-select. This is genuinely useful semantic information.

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 specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('an app's crawled website sources'), and the exact data returned (id, URL, current RAG tags). It also names the downstream tools that consume the ids, which distinguishes it from sibling source tools like ethora-sources-docs-list-v2 and ethora-sources-site-crawl-v2.

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 explicitly states prerequisites ('Requires: a selected app (`ethora-app-select`) or an explicit `appId`'), auth modes, and error conditions (401/403 wrong auth, 404 unknown appId, empty list if nothing crawled). This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance, including the alternative of selecting an app first.

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