aura_bundle

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It helpfully discloses that per-item errors never fail the batch, which is a real behavioral trait. But it omits read-only nature (implied but unstated), what the response shape looks like, and id-vs-slug resolution behavior.

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?

One compact sentence that front-loads the key operation and the batch constraint. No wasted words.

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?

No annotations and no output schema mean the description must do more. It covers the core operation and partial-failure behavior but leaves return shape, id/slug combination semantics, and required-vs-optional handling unspecified.

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 coverage is 0% and both parameters are undocumented in the schema. The description only hints at ids/slugs and the 2-8 constraint; it doesn't explain array formats, whether both can be combined, or whether any parameter is required (schema says none).

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 (bulk-fetch) and resource (component details), with the batch size (2-8) and inputs (ids or slugs) made explicit. It distinguishes itself reasonably from siblings like aura_get_component and aura_bulk_fetch, though it doesn't explicitly name the single-item sibling it replaces.

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?

Usage is implied — fetch 2-8 items in one call — but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over aura_get_component or aura_bulk_fetch, nor when to use ids vs slugs.

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