Get Live Source

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so the read-only nature is covered. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context beyond that, such as error handling, return format, or prerequisites, leaving the agent with only the basic function statement.

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, terse sentence that is easy to parse and front-loaded with the action. It is appropriately concise, though it largely restates the tool title and could be slightly more informative.

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 simple getter tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description is minimally sufficient. It states the core operation but omits details about return values or when a live source might not be found. Given the low complexity, the lack of extra context is acceptable but not ideal.

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 input schema already provides 100% description coverage for both parameters (rag_id and live_source_id), so the description does not need to compensate. It adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, but this is acceptable given the high schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Fetch' with the resource 'live source' and the 'by id' qualifier, which clearly identifies the tool as a single-resource retrieval operation. This distinguishes it from sibling operations like lyzr_livesource_list or lyzr_livesource_remove.

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 is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list, add, or remove. The description simply states what the tool does without any contextual or conditional instructions.

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