hyperd.bundle

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

With no annotations, the description fully bears the burden. It discloses parallelism (up to 10 sub-calls, concurrency cap 4), pricing ($0.20 USDC), best-effort execution, and refund policy (no refunds in v1.0). These traits go well beyond the schema.

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 4 clear, front-loaded sentences. No extraneous content; every sentence adds critical information about purpose, behavior, pricing, and usage.

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?

While the description covers usage and behavioral details well, it omits the structure of the return envelope. Since there is no output schema, the agent lacks information about what the response will look like, which is a notable gap.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining how parameters are used in practice (parallelism, pricing, error handling), but does not introduce new parameter constraints 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 states that the tool bundles multiple paid GET calls into one x402 settlement. This is a specific verb+resource combination and clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like hyperd.balance.get or hyperd.wallet.balance which are individual calls.

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?

It explicitly advises using this tool when needing 3+ paid calls, and provides a cost comparison (fixed $0.20 vs. à la carte total > $0.24). This gives clear when-to-use guidance, though it does not explicitly state when not to use it.

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