listSources

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and closed-world behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond those: auth requirements (free community login or SQAI_API_KEY), the deterministic nature of the computation catalog, and the offline-after-login behavior. This is useful but does not describe edge cases or exact output formatting.

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 dense but organized: it front-loads the purpose, separates the three modes with clear markers, and ends with the necessary login note. Every sentence carries load-bearing information, with no filler or redundancy.

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 no-required-params discovery tool with no output schema, the description tells the agent what to expect from each mode, states prerequisites (login/API key), and explains why it should be called before queryData. No important aspect of correct invocation is left unspecified.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3 and the schema already explains both optional parameters. The description adds the default no-argument mode and calls the capability catalog deterministic, but essentially restates the schema's parameter descriptions rather than adding substantial new semantics.

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 opens with the role ('Discover what SQAI can touch') and then specifies three concrete modes: listing connected data sources with exact field names/types/allowed operations, searching the capability catalog, and listing module functions with exact signatures. It also differentiates from the sibling queryData by instructing the agent to call it before queryData so specs use exact names.

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?

It gives explicit guidance for the main workflow: 'call this before queryData so specs use exact names,' and it explains when to use the capabilitySearch and module variants. It does not explicitly state when to prefer queryData or explainQuery, so it stops short of full when/when-not coverage.

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