List bumps

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds contextual detail about what a bump is and that the listing spans all products on the account, but it does not disclose other behavioral traits such as result ordering, pagination, or whether deleted bumps are included. This is adequate but not rich.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: the first states the operation, the second defines the domain concept, and the third explains practical use. The most important content is front-loaded, with 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?

For a simple list operation with one documented optional parameter and strong annotations, the description is nearly complete. It explains the purpose, the domain object, and the connection to get_bump via the id. The lack of an output schema is mitigated by the clear statement that the tool returns bumps with ids, though it does not specify other returned fields.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage for the single optional 'account' parameter, so the schema already documents its meaning and default behavior. The description does not add new parameter detail, keeping the score at the baseline of 3.

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 opens with 'List every bump across all products on a ThriveCart account', which is a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also defines what a bump is ('checkbox add-on shown on the checkout page itself'), clearly distinguishing it from main products and from other list tools.

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 explicitly states when to use it: 'Use this to see what a cart offers beyond its main products, and to get an id for get_bump.' It gives a concrete purpose and points to the follow-up tool, though it does not explicitly discuss when not to use it or contrast it with list_upsells/list_downsells.

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