tokportal_list_account_bundles

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety and idempotency. The description adds the 'delivered account' constraint, but doesn't disclose any other behavioral traits like pagination defaults or potential errors. Score is adequate given annotations already provide key 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 sentence with no wasted words, making it very concise. It is front-loaded with the action, but could benefit from structural elements like a note on algorithm or alternative. Still, it earns its place without redundancy.

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 4 parameters (including pagination and filtering), no output schema, and a large sibling set, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain return value format, how filtering by status works, or how the tool relates to others like tokportal_list_bundles. Completeness is lacking for contextual 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%, so the schema already documents all four parameters (id, page, status, per_page) with their types and constraints. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what's in the schema, so baseline 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 states 'List bundles for a delivered account', which specifies a verb and resource. However, it doesn't clarify what a 'delivered account' means, leaving ambiguity about the tool's scope. The sibling tool 'tokportal_list_bundles' likely lists bundles more broadly, but the description doesn't differentiate between them, so purpose is somewhat vague.

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 provided on when to use this tool versus tokportal_list_bundles or other bundle-related tools. The description gives no context for when a delivered account applies or excludes alternatives, leaving the agent to infer usage without support.

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