tokportal_list_bundles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond 'List', such as pagination defaults (though half the parameters are pagination-related), result ordering, filtering behavior, or rate limits. The description fails to leverage the opportunity to add value beyond annotations.

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?

While the description is short (2 words), it is under-specified rather than efficiently informative. It does not earn its place; it merely echoes the tool name. True conciseness would front-load key context (scope, filtering, pagination) without redundancy. This is closer to a placeholder than a crafted summary.

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?

The tool has 7 optional parameters (including pagination and multiple filters) and no output schema, yet the description offers no context about the entity 'bundle', the response structure, or how filters interact. An agent cannot infer whether this lists all bundles or scoped to a context. Without additional context, the description is incomplete for a listing tool with such richness.

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%, meaning each parameter has a basic description in the schema (e.g., 'Page number.', 'Filter by bundle status.'). The tool description 'List bundles' adds no additional parameter meaning, interaction hints, or examples. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema carries the burden, but the description doesn't compensate for any gaps.

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 'List bundles' is nearly a tautology of the tool name 'tokportal_list_bundles'. It states a verb and resource but adds no specificity about what a 'bundle' is, the scope of listing, or how it differs from siblings like 'tokportal_list_account_bundles' or 'tokportal_list_bundle_videos'. Purpose is marginally clear but not enriched beyond the name.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With over 60 sibling tools including several list and get operations, the absence of any usage context makes it hard for an agent to select this tool correctly. No when-to-use or when-not-to-use information is present.

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