tokportal_update_bundle

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

Annotations already indicate this is a mutation (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive or idempotent. The description adds 'Updates mutable bundle metadata' but does not disclose whether the update is partial or full replacement, side effects, auth requirements, or rate limits. Since the schema suggests a partial update (body has minProperties:1 and optional fields), the description could clarify this, but it does not. It adds minimal value beyond the 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?

The description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no extraneous information. Every word earns its place, making it efficient and easy to parse.

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 tool with 3 parameters (including a nested object) and no output schema, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details about the return value (e.g., what the updated bundle looks like) and how the nested body structure works. Given the large set of sibling tools, a bit more context (e.g., 'This is a PATCH-like update; returns the updated bundle') would improve completeness. The description is adequate but not fully informative.

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% with descriptions for all parameters. The description lists the updatable fields (title, external_ref, auto_finalize_videos), which reinforces the schema but adds no new semantic meaning. The term 'mutable bundle metadata' hints that some fields are immutable, but this is not specified. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the description does not significantly compensate beyond the schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Update bundle settings' and lists specific mutable fields (title, external_ref, auto_finalize_videos). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create, get, publish, and unpublish, as it focuses on updating mutable metadata rather than creation, retrieval, or state changes.

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 implies usage through its verb and resource, but provides no explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it (e.g., for immutable fields or state changes) or reference other tools like tokportal_create_bundle or tokportal_configure_bundle_account. The usage context is clear from the name and siblings but not explicitly stated.

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