bundle_analyze_size

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 says 'Analyze' and does not mention authentication via api_key, possible network calls, output format, or side effects. The presence of an api_key parameter hints at external behavior, but the description does not clarify it.

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 with no filler words. It efficiently names the verb, resource, and input sources, though it could be considered slightly under-structured for a tool with three parameters and no annotations.

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 has no output schema and no annotations, so the description must be more complete to compensate. It does not describe return values, authentication requirements, expected build-stats format, or how this differs from closely related bundle-analysis siblings, leaving an agent with meaningful gaps.

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 the baseline is 3. The description loosely maps to package_json and build_stats by mentioning 'package.json dependencies or build output', but it adds no detail beyond the schema and does not explain how the parameters interact or when each is appropriate.

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: 'Analyze JavaScript bundle size' from 'package.json dependencies or build output'. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate from similar sibling tools like webpack_analyze_bundle or bundle_find_heavy_deps, so it loses the last point.

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?

There is no guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as webpack_analyze_bundle or bundle_find_heavy_deps. The description implies usage for bundle-size analysis, but it provides no exclusions, when-not-to-use, or alternative routing.

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