tv_support_bundle

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose an important behavioral trait: removal of 'identifiers, source code, URLs, titles, and secret-like values'. However, it does not explain what the bundle actually contains (beyond what is removed), whether it is returned as a file or path, or any side effects. The claim of 'compressed' adds some detail but lacks specifics.

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, focused sentence that leads with the action and resource, and immediately conveys the key privacy attribute. There is no wasted text or repetition. It is appropriately sized for a tool with one optional parameter.

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 has one optional parameter with good schema documentation and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It explains the purpose and a key behavioral aspect (privacy-safe), but does not describe what the resulting bundle looks like, how it is delivered, or any additional context needed to use the tool effectively. The lack of output schema means the description should have explained the return format, but it remains silent.

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 the single parameter 'telemetry_lines' documented as 'Recent bounded telemetry records to include (default 100)'. The description does not mention this parameter at all, but the schema already provides full semantics. Since coverage is high, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description adds no additional parameter meaning.

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's function: 'Create a privacy-safe compressed diagnostics bundle'. It uses the specific verb 'Create' and identifies the resource as a diagnostics bundle, with the added scope of privacy-safe removal of sensitive data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tv_health_check or tv_watchdog_sample, which focus on health checks or watchdog sampling rather than bundle creation.

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 implies usage for support/diagnostics via the phrase 'diagnostics bundle', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no exclusion guidance or mention of alternative tools. The context of 'privacy-safe' hints at scenarios where sensitive data must be redacted, but this is not spelled out.

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