okf_list_bundles_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the disclosure burden. 'List' conveys a read-only, non-mutating operation and 'loaded' scopes the behavior, but the description does not explicitly state side-effect safety or response characteristics. For a zero-parameter list tool, this is acceptable but not richly transparent.

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 with no filler. It front-loads the action and object, making the purpose immediately clear.

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 zero-parameter listing operation with an output schema, the description provides enough information to call the tool correctly: it identifies the resource type and scope. Return values are covered by the output schema, so their absence from the description is not a gap.

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?

There are no parameters, so the schema is already complete and there is nothing for the description to explain. The description adds useful context by naming the resource and scope, but no parameter-specific semantics are needed.

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 a clear verb ('List'), a specific object ('OKF bundles'), and a scope qualifier ('this server has loaded'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like okf_registry_list and list_review_queue by subject matter.

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 when to use the tool (when needing to see loaded OKF bundles) but gives no explicit guidance about alternatives or when not to use it. With siblings like okf_registry_list present, an explicit differentiation would strengthen this dimension.

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