whodb_platform_bundle_import_plan

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds that the tool is deliberately non-mutating and that workspace targeting is per-call without altering defaults. It stays consistent with annotations and adds real behavioral context (ephemeral targeting), though nothing about rate limits or evaluation cost.

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?

Front-loads the purpose in the first sentence, then covers mode and targeting in two short follow-ups. Efficient overall, with only minor duplication of the workspace schema wording.

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?

With an output schema present and 100% parameter coverage, the description need not explain returns or param syntax. It covers purpose, plan-only mode, targeting, and the execution escape hatch, leaving only the sibling-routing detail unmentioned.

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 five parameters are already documented. The description restates the workspace {host, org, project} targeting-sans-defaults behavior, which is useful but largely duplicates the schema, and it never mentions prefix, rename_conflicts, or overwrite_conflicts. Baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Plan how a project bundle would import into the selected hosted project') and explicitly declares its mode ('intentionally plan-only'), which cleanly separates it from the sibling whodb_platform_bundle_import. An agent can identify the tool's role 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?

Gives explicit when-to-use context ('intentionally plan-only', review before execution) and names an alternative execution path ('CLI resources import --yes'). It does not, however, point to the in-MCP sibling whodb_platform_bundle_import as the follow-up, which is a modest gap in routing.

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