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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral detail by specifying exactly what each result contains: set price, separate part costs, savings, and included items.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: definition, result contents, and use case. The practical example ('instrument plus the accessories normally needed with it') adds clarity without bloat, and the most useful guidance is front-loaded.

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 list tool with nine parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core domain concept, output shape, and appropriate use case. It relies appropriately on the schema for parameter details, though it could mention default language/currency or pagination if those were non-obvious.

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 89%, so the input schema already documents most parameters well. The description adds context about bundle semantics and result contents but does not substantially clarify parameter meanings beyond what the schema provides.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List bundles'), defines what a bundle is, and explicitly contrasts it with listing separate products. The 'recommending one set beats listing five separate products' line makes its purpose distinct from sibling product-search tools.

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 clearly states when to use the tool: for 'what do I need to get started' questions where a bundle is more helpful than separate product listings. It does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it falls short of a full 5.

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