tokportal_list_bundles

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

Annotations correctly indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't contradict them. While it adds no behavioral detail beyond the annotations—e.g., it doesn't mention that listing might have performance implications or require any authentication—the annotations already cover the safety profile, so a 3 is appropriate.

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 two words—clear and brief, but it's under-specified rather than concisely informative. It doesn't earn its place by adding value beyond the tool name. A moderate score reflects that it is not bloated, but also not helpful.

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 7 parameters with no output schema and no description of the return structure, the description is insufficient. The agent cannot infer what data is returned (e.g., paginated list with total count, metadata) or how to leverage the available filters. This is a significant gap for a data-listing tool.

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 7 parameters well, including enums for platform and bundle_type. The description adds no parameter-specific guidance, but given full schema coverage, the baseline is 3, and the concise description (though minimal) does not detract, earning a 4.

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 is 'List bundles.' which is a tautology—it simply restates the tool's name without adding specifics about what operations are available (e.g., filtering, pagination) or how this differs from 80+ siblings, some of which also involve 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?

No usage context is provided. Among numerous bundle-related siblings like tokportal_list_account_bundles and tokportal_list_bundle_videos, the description offers no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., listing all bundles vs. bundles for a specific account vs. videos within a bundle).

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