List OtaKit bundles

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

Annotations already declare the safe-read profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), so the bar is lower. The description still adds value by disclosing that pagination is bounded and that results are 'safe' metadata plus release-artifact history, though it doesn't explain what 'safe' excludes or how the cursor behaves.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler: scope first ('for one app'), then pagination and filter modifiers. Nothing could be cut without losing information.

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?

No output schema, but the description sketches the return content (metadata plus release-artifact history) and the annotations carry the safety profile. It is nearly complete; only the shape of paginated results and what 'safe' omits are left unspecified.

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 100%, so all four parameters are already documented in the schema, including the appId conditional requirement. The description merely alludes to pagination and exact-version filtering, which the schema states more precisely, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb ('List') and two concrete resources ('safe bundle metadata and release-artifact history') and scopes them to one app, which cleanly separates it from the singular get_bundle sibling. An agent can tell what this returns without opening the schema.

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 rather than stated: listing bundles for an app, with the version filter offered as an optional narrowing. There is no explicit when-to-use guidance versus get_bundle, list_releases, or delete_bundle, and no stated prerequisites beyond what the schema covers.

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