list_source_packs

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden: it discloses that each entry includes a last-checked date and that non-pack datasets yield a ROW GRAIN UNKNOWN warning, which is genuinely useful behavioral context. It does not cover result size, pagination, ordering, or auth/permission needs for a zero-param listing tool.

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 tight sentences with the core purpose front-loaded and the warning caveat placed after. Slight redundancy in restating 'these packs', but nothing that fails to earn 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 no-parameter, no-output-schema listing tool, the description conveys what comes back (portals, datasets, freshness dates) and the caveat attached to non-pack data. Only ordering/pagination expectations are unaddressed, a minor gap.

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 zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; the baseline 4 applies. No misleading parameter language is present.

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 (portals and datasets documented by a source pack) plus an attribute returned (last-checked date). It is clearly distinct from query_dataset/search_datasets by scope, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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?

Usage is implied rather than stated: an agent infers this is the inventory/freshness lookup. The note that datasets outside packs remain queryable is useful context but is framed as a consequence, not as an explicit 'use X instead when Y' routing rule.

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