List Sources (deprecated)

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, indicating no side effects. The description adds that it returns source IDs, titles, types, and metadata, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 two sentences plus a deprecation note, front-loaded with the most important information (deprecation). Every sentence serves a purpose: deprecation warning, action (listing sources), return values, and use case.

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?

Given the tool's deprecated status, the description adequately covers what it does, what it returns, and how to find an alternative. No output schema exists, but the description lists return fields. Lacks mention of pagination or limits, but acceptable for a deprecated tool.

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 coverage is 100% with a description for the optional `source_ids` parameter. The description only mentions filtering by source IDs, which is already provided in the schema, so no additional meaning is added.

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 clearly states the tool lists ingested sources in Hydra DB memory, returns specific fields (IDs, titles, types, metadata), and mentions deprecation. It distinguishes from siblings by directing to `hydradb_list`.

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 explicitly advises using `hydradb_list` instead due to deprecation, and explains when to use this tool: to see ingested sources and find source IDs. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use scenarios but the deprecation serves as guidance.

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