List Import Sources

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description only adds that sources are RSS/Atom-typed and that all configured entries are returned without filtering; it says nothing about pagination or result size.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is terse to the point of under-specification, but as a conciseness measure it is close to ideal.

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-argument, read-only listing tool with annotations covering the safety profile and no output schema, the description supplies what an agent needs to invoke it. The only meaningful gap is the absence of routing guidance versus list_import_jobs.

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 the baseline of 4 applies. There is nothing in the schema for the description to explain or compensate for.

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 a specific resource ('configured RSS/Atom import sources'), which is enough for an agent to distinguish it from mutation siblings such as create_import_source, update_import_source, and delete_import_source. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish itself from the closely related list_import_jobs.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisite or exclusion statements, and no mention of the nearest alternative (list_import_jobs, trigger_import_source). Usage is only implied by the word 'configured'.

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