List share link bundles

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, openWorld, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds conceptual context about Paperless-ngx 3.x and bundle semantics but does not disclose return shape or pagination details, which is acceptable given the annotation coverage.

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, focused sentence with no filler and defines the key concept and version context. It is minimally structured but effective because the title already carries the action.

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 filtered list operation with five self-documenting parameters and clear read-only annotations, the essential calling information is present. However, with no output schema, a brief statement about the return format or pagination behavior would have made the description more complete.

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%, with every parameter (full, page, ordering, page_size, name__icontains) having its own schema description. The tool description itself adds no parameter-level semantics, so the baseline score of 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?

The title supplies the list verb, while the description defines the resource as 'share link bundles... expose several documents behind a single public link.' This distinguishes bundles from simple share links but stops short of explicitly stating that this tool returns all matching bundles.

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?

No direct when-to-use guidance or sibling exclusions are given. The description implies that this tool is for multi-document public links, while sibling names like list_share_links suggest a related but different resource, but the agent must infer the boundary from naming and context.

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