list_product_bundles

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 only reveals that this is a GET request (read-only) via the endpoint, but does not mention pagination, sorting, response format, required permissions, or any side effects. For a list tool returning possibly many bundles, the lack of behavior details is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded sentence stating the purpose and endpoint. Every element serves a purpose, and there is no fluff. It is concise while conveying the essential operation and target resource.

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?

The tool is simple (2 params, one required) and the description gives the core operation. However, there is no output schema and no mention of return structure, pagination limits, or how to differentiate from sibling list tools. Given the lack of annotations and the presence of many similar tools, the description is functional but incomplete for a fully informed agent.

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% (both product_id and product_version have descriptions). The description adds the endpoint structure showing product_id as a URL path parameter, but this is already implicit in the parameter name and schema. No additional semantic meaning beyond the schema is provided, 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 the tool's exact function: '取得商品方案列表' (get product bundle list) and provides the HTTP endpoint 'GET /v1/products/{product_id}/bundles', which clearly identifies the resource and scope (bundles of a specific product). This distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_bundles' (global bundles) and 'list_bundle_items' (items within a bundle) via the product_id path parameter.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'list_bundles' or 'get_bundle'. The description merely states what the tool does without any exclusions, prerequisites, or comparison to sibling tools. There is no mention of when this is preferred over other similar list/get operations.

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