tokportal_create_bundle

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

With sparse annotations (all false), the description provides extensive behavioral details: atomic checkout with immediate credit debit, server-side cost calculation, allowance slot consumption, cutoff policy for new customers, advanced warming purchase options and auto-cancel rules, external_ref semantics, and idempotency key role. This far exceeds minimal disclosure.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then logically flows through payment, cost, allowances, warming options, and idempotency. Every sentence provides necessary context without redundancy, packing significant information efficiently.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested body, conditional fields, financial implications, no output schema), the description covers all essential aspects: creation, payment timing, cost determination, allowance consumption, warming configuration, duplicate detection, and safe retry. No critical gaps.

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 descriptions cover 100% of parameters. The description adds value beyond schema by explaining how external_ref works (duplicate detection vs retry), the relationship between advanced_warming_terms and advanced_warming_terms_count, and the auto-cancel rule for count-only purchases. This nuance justifies above the baseline 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 explicitly states it creates and pays three distinct bundle types (account-only, account-and-videos, videos-only) in one atomic checkout, using specific verbs and resource. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like get/update/publish 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?

The description clearly defines the tool's purpose and when it should be used (creating a bundle with payment). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like tokportal_create_bundles_bulk for multiple bundles, though the scope is clear.

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