tokportal_get_bundle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral context—no mention of authentication requirements, rate limits, scoping, or response behavior. With annotations present, the description's burden is lower, but it still contributes nothing beyond what is already structured.

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 extremely short (3 words) but this is under-specification rather than efficient conciseness. It lacks essential context and requires the agent to infer the tool's purpose. A single sentence can be concise yet informative; this one is not.

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 (many sibling tools, no output schema, only one parameter), the description is completely inadequate. It does not explain what a bundle is, what fields are returned, any prerequisites, or how output differs from other get tools. The missing output schema increases the burden on the description, which it fails to meet.

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 100% (1 parameter 'id' with format uuid and description 'Bundle ID.'). The description "Get a bundle." does not add any meaning to the parameter beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema is self-sufficient.

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 "Get a bundle." is a near-tautology of the tool name. It states the verb and resource but provides no differentiation from sibling tools like tokportal_get_bundle_publish_readiness, tokportal_get_bundle_account, or tokportal_get_bundle_video. The agent cannot infer what a 'bundle' is or what specific data this tool retrieves.

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 guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes many 'get' tools (e.g., tokportal_list_bundles, tokportal_get_bundle_publish_readiness, tokportal_get_bundle_account) without any criteria to choose among them. This is a critical omission.

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