list_gaql_resources

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true. The description adds useful behavioral nuance by saying it returns 'commonly used resource names', which signals the list may not be exhaustive and is scoped to practical usage. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, and the second sentence clarifies the return value. Every word contributes useful information.

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 zero-parameter, read-only list tool, the description is complete: it states what is listed, why it is useful, and what the caller gets back ('resource names'). No additional schema or output schema is needed to make the tool safely callable.

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 has zero parameters and the schema has no properties, so the description does not need to explain parameter meaning. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description correctly avoids adding irrelevant parameter details.

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 and resource: 'List available GAQL FROM-clause resources' and explicitly ties it to execute_gaql. It is clearly differentiated from siblings like execute_gaql and get_field_metadata, which do different things.

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 phrase 'for use with execute_gaql' gives clear contextual usage: call this when you need to know which FROM-clause resources are available before running a GAQL query. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the context is strong enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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