list_sources

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

No annotations are present, and the description gives no information about side effects, read-only behavior, authentication requirements, pagination, or rate limits. The agent cannot infer the behavioral contract from this description alone.

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 very brief and contains no redundant or excessive content. It is front-loaded with the core resource name, though it lacks action-oriented wording.

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 description is too minimal to be contextually complete. It omits expected list-behavior details such as pagination, ordering, filtering, return shape, and any relationship to the account_id parameter. An agent would likely need to inspect the output schema or make assumptions.

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 fully describes the two parameters (account_id and raw) with their types and descriptions, so schema coverage is high. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, keeping this at 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 tool name 'list_sources' clearly indicates a listing action for source resources, but the description 'Справочник источников кандидатов' is a noun phrase rather than an explicit verb phrase. It identifies the resource but does not fully state what the tool does.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling list tools such as list_vacancies, list_stages, or list_tags. No use cases or alternative selection criteria are mentioned.

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