linkding_get_bundle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only the raw REST path (GET /api/bundles/<id>/), which tells an agent nothing new beyond the annotations; no mention of error behavior for missing ids or what is returned.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action and resource, no filler. The REST path sentence is low-value for an agent but harmless in size.

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 trivial single-parameter read tool with annotations covering safety and a fully documented schema, the essentials are present. It lacks any indication of return shape or not-found handling, though with no output schema that omission is minor.

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% and the single parameter 'id' is documented with type and bounds in the schema. The description's 'by id' restates rather than enriches the parameter, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Get one bundle') and scopes it to a single record by id, which implicitly distinguishes it from linkding_list_bundles. It stops short of naming the sibling or describing what a bundle contains.

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?

'Get one bundle by id' implies single-record retrieval versus the list variant, but there is no explicit statement of when to use this over linkding_list_bundles or what to do when the id is unknown. Usage is inferable rather than guided.

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