mogut_discover_sources

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral transparency burden, and it is largely successful: it discloses the cached/past-call default vs. the live probe mode. A minor gap is that it never explicitly states that listing sources is a non-mutating read operation or how a failed live request is reported, but the central behavioral difference is clear.

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 essential. The first fronts the exact purpose and output fields; the second efficiently covers the parameter's behavior. Every word earns its place.

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 tool with a single optional parameter and no output schema, this description is complete: it enumerates the returned fields, explains the default vs live modes, and covers the probe behavior. There is no meaningful missing context an agent would need to 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 coverage is 100% with the probe parameter already documented, so the baseline is 3. The description exceeds that by contrasting probe=true with the default behavior (reporting what past calls recorded), which adds meaning beyond the schema's description of 'one live health request per configured source.'

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 (lists) with a concrete resource (data sources) and the exact attributes returned: tier, required credentials, health status, and confidence level. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like mogut_discover_profiles by resource type, though it does not explicitly name any sibling.

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 gives clear mode-level guidance comparing probe=true (live one-request-per-source) to the default cached behavior, which helps an agent decide on the parameter value. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings such as mogut_status, mogut_setup_check, or mogut_discover_profiles.

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