get_eventsources

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context such as pagination behavior, response shape, or whether this returns all EventSources versus a scoped subset.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the core action, containing no filler or repetition. It is slightly too terse to fully orient an agent, but it earns its place without waste.

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?

The schema and annotations compensate for much of the missing detail, making this minimally viable for a simple read-only list endpoint. However, the description leaves unclear which set of EventSources is being listed and does not mention pagination or output expectations, so it is 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?

The input schema has 100% coverage and each parameter includes a meaningful description, so the schema carries the parameter-level burden. The tool description adds no parameter information, which is acceptable but does not elevate the score above the baseline.

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 states a clear verb and resource: 'List EventSources' unambiguously indicates a collection-listing operation. However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from sibling tools like get_eventsource or get_device_eventsources, so it lacks differentiation.

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 guidance on when to use get_eventsources versus alternatives such as get_eventsource, get_device_eventsources, or get_collector_groups. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or suggested filter combinations, leaving the agent to infer all usage context.

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