tokportal_get_bundle_account

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds no additional behavioral context (e.g., what the configuration contains, whether it requires an active bundle account). With annotations present, the description is minimally acceptable but does not enrich transparency.

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 short sentence that earns its place by clarifying the target resource ('configuration'). It is efficient but slightly repetitive with the tool name. No wasted words, though a bit more structure (e.g., specifying it is read-only) would be beneficial.

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 simple one-parameter retrieval tool with good annotations, the description is adequate but not complete. It does not hint at the return shape (no output schema) or any contextual details like whether the configuration includes nested objects. The sibling tools suggest complex account management, so some additional context would help an AI agent.

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% (the single parameter 'id' has description 'Bundle ID.'). The tool description does not add any extra meaning for the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 bundle account configuration' clearly identifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('bundle account configuration'), which adds specificity beyond the tool name. However, it does not distinguish this from sibling tools like tokportal_get_bundle (which retrieves a bundle) or tokportal_get_account (which gets an account).

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or preferred contexts. For example, it could note that this tool retrieves the configuration of a bundle account, while tokportal_configure_bundle_account is used to update it.

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