list_sources

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It does clarify that the data sources come from DATA_FILE / DATA_SOURCES configuration and describes a list operation, which implies read-only behavior. However, it does not disclose potential side effects, staleness, or whether the list is dynamically refreshed or cached.

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 concise sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the main action and resource, then adds the configuration detail parenthetically.

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 parameterless list tool with an output schema, the description is complete: it states what the tool returns conceptually (available data sources) and where that information comes from (configuration). No additional return-value or parameter details are necessary given the output schema.

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 schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter burden for the description to carry. The baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description appropriately says nothing about 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 ('列出' / list) and a specific resource ('数据源' / data sources), making the tool's function immediately clear. It also distinguishes this tool from siblings like refresh_sources and list_columns by focusing on enumerating configured data sources.

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 implies that this tool should be used to discover currently available data sources, especially before operating on them. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as refresh_sources or get_schema, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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