Apply Bundle Template

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

Annotations already indicate this is not read-only and not idempotent, so the agent knows it's a mutating operation. However, the description adds no further transparency: it doesn't explain the confirm parameter (likely requiring user confirmation), the effect of default_bundle, or any side effects. For a non-read-only tool, this is a significant 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, grammatically simple sentence with no fluff, which is concise. However, given the tool has 4 parameters and nuanced behavior (confirm, default_bundle), the description is too sparse to be considered well-structured. It is efficiently short but not appropriately sized for the tool's complexity.

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?

For a tool with 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotation hints about behavior, this description is incomplete. It does not explain how confirmation works, what default_bundle affects, or what happens after creation. It provides only the core action without the contextual details needed for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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?

The schema has 4 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the tool description mentions none of them. It only hints at 'template' (template_id) but completely fails to explain name, confirm, and default_bundle. With such low coverage, the description was obligated to compensate, and it does not.

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 the action (create) and the resource (a new bundle) with a specific source (from a custom template). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like bundled_create_bundle, which likely creates a bundle without a template.

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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like bundled_create_bundle or bundled_duplicate_entry. It does not mention any prerequisites (e.g., the template must exist) or exclusions. The only implied context is that it's for creating bundles from custom templates, but no explicit when/when-not guidance is given.

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