Validate XDaLa bundle

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

No annotations, so description carries burden. It discloses rejecting root validation metadata and specific bundle-level fields, making behavioral constraints clear. However, does not explicitly state whether validation has side effects or requires authorization.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and alias. Each sentence adds value: alias, scope, exclusions. No fluff.

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?

Despite simple parameter count, description lacks detail on return value or error handling. No output schema, and schema coverage is 0%. User has no guidance on what validation result looks like.

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 0%. Description does not explain the 'bundle' parameter structure or expected format beyond implying it should be a valid deployable bundle, so it fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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?

Description clearly states it validates canonical deployable xgr-multi-bundle@1, specifying the exact version and type. It distinguishes from siblings by noting it's an alias for validate_xgr_multibundle and lists excluded fields.

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?

Explicitly says when to use (validating deployable bundles) and when not (session start handoffs must use create_xdala_session_start_handoff or get_xgr_session_start_schema), naming alternative tools.

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