list_datasources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type ('JSON string') and scope ('all configured data sources'), and 'List' implies a read-only operation. However, it does not mention permission requirements, connection validity, or pagination/filtering behavior.

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 short and front-loaded with the core purpose. The Args/Returns structure is clear, though the Returns line partly duplicates what the output schema already conveys.

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 one-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter, and return format. It lacks usage guidance and deeper parameter context, so it is adequate but not fully complete.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only says 'Name of the Grafana connection', which adds minimal meaning beyond the property name/title. It does not explain how to find valid connection names or what happens if the connection does not exist.

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 action ('List all configured data sources') and identifies the Grafana context. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_connections or get_datasource_health, which target different resources.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention list_connections, get_datasource_health, or any conditions/exclusions. The only implied context is that a Grafana connection name is required.

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