list_ingress_sources

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important access restrictions (admin, hosted), but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, destructive, or other behavioral traits. Adequate but has gaps.

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 a single efficient sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and resource, then adds restrictions in a concise manner.

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 list tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose and restrictions but does not describe the return format or any additional context about delivery counters. Adequate but incomplete for a fully self-contained description.

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, so the baseline is 4 per rules. The description does not need to add parameter info, and it correctly explains the tool's purpose without needing to mention parameters.

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 uses a specific verb 'list' and resource 'inbound connector sources' with additional detail 'with delivery counters'. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_agents or list_webhooks.

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 'admin only' and 'Hosted API only', providing clear context on when this tool is applicable. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it.

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