List Dataville data sources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful behavior beyond that: it discloses the shape of what comes back (one-line descriptions plus tables) and that the tables are those query_dataville can read, which matters because there is no output schema.

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?

Two sentences, both front-loaded: the return content first, the routing hint second. No filler, no restatement of the title.

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?

Zero parameters, full annotation coverage, and no output schema, yet the description still explains what the listing contains and how results relate to query_dataville. An agent has everything needed to call it and to decide what to do next.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline is 4. There is nothing for the description to clarify or misstate, and it adds no spurious parameter-like guidance.

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 (list) and resource (Dataville data sources), and specifies what each entry contains: a one-line description and the SQL tables readable by query_dataville. It also implicitly distinguishes itself from describe_dataville_source, which the agent is told to use for per-source 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?

The second sentence routes the agent to describe_dataville_source for keyword format and table columns, clarifying when this tool is not the right one. It lacks an explicit statement of when to prefer this tool over search_dataville, but the enumeration-vs-detail split is clear.

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