logicstamp_list_bundles

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It explains that bundles are fresh in watch mode, that it lists only root bundles (not dependencies), and that it handles race conditions internally. Lacks an explicit statement that it is read-only, but the context is sufficient.

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 front-loaded with a critical warning and structured with bullet points. While somewhat verbose, every sentence adds essential information. Could be slightly trimmed but overall effective.

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 no output schema, the description explains what the tool returns (bundle catalog with fields). It also provides context about dependencies, next steps, and all three parameters, making it complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, so baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining when to use each parameter (e.g., snapshotId vs projectPath based on watch mode) and provides an example for folderPrefix, going beyond the schema definitions.

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 it lists all ROOT bundles from context_main.json, returns a bundle catalog with specific fields, and distinguishes between root components and dependencies. It also explains what to do if a component is missing, making the purpose unmistakable.

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?

Provides explicit critical guidance: not to use sleep() delays, when to use projectPath vs snapshotId, how to filter with folderPrefix, and what tool to call next (read_bundle). This differentiates it from siblings like logicstamp_read_bundle.

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