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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, idempotent, destructive mutation, so the description does not need to restate safety basics. It usefully adds that only title and/or description change and the slug is immutable, but does not explain overwrite behavior, permissions, or return behavior.

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 tightly written sentence with no waste. The mutation scope is front-loaded, and the parenthetical definition of a bundle is brief and useful.

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 metadata-update tool with full schema coverage and annotations, the description provides enough context to call it correctly. The only minor gap is that it does not state what the operation returns, but no output schema is present and the call is straightforward.

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 schema has 100% parameter coverage and documents all three parameters, including rootKey as the bundle root identifier. The description names the mutable fields and the and/or nature of the update, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema.

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 gives a clear verb and resource: it changes a bundle's title and/or description, and defines a bundle parenthetically. It also distinguishes this from slug-changing operations by stating the slug never changes here, though it does not name a specific sibling alternative.

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?

Usage is implied by the stated fields: use this to edit a bundle's title or description, not its slug. However, there are no explicit when-to-use/when-not-to-use instructions or named alternatives such as bundle creation or reslug operations.

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