List Bundles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a safe read. The description adds the archived-bundle filtering behavior, but does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or default limits beyond the schema. This is moderate additional context.

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, direct sentence: 'List bundles, optionally including archived bundles.' It is concise, front-loaded with the action and resource, and contains no filler or redundancy.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and strong annotations, the description is largely adequate. It clearly states the core purpose and the key optional behavior. However, it omits any mention of the 'limit' parameter's effect on results and there is no output schema, leaving minor gaps about pagination and return details. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a basic list operation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains 'include_archived' via 'optionally including archived bundles', but it does not mention 'limit'. While 'limit' is self-explanatory, the description does not fully carry the burden for all parameters, providing only partial compensation.

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 tool's function: 'List bundles, optionally including archived bundles.' The verb 'List' and resource 'bundles' are specific, and the optional archived filter adds scope. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like bundled_list_templates or bundled_get_bundle.

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 implies the tool's use case by stating what it lists, but it does not explicitly mention when to prefer this over alternatives like bundled_get_bundle for a single bundle or bundled_set_bundle_archived for changing archive status. No exclusions or alternative tool references are provided.

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