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

Adds substance beyond the annotations: one code per account, credit grant equivalent to a 15-second film, and a free film even for accounts that never bought a pack. It does not say what happens on an invalid or already-redeemed code, but the effects are otherwise well disclosed.

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 tight sentences, front-loaded with what the tool does before the operational constraints and the follow-up action. Dense but nearly every clause carries actionable information.

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 single-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers effect (credits + free film), idempotency context, and the next step. The only omission is error/duplicate handling, which is minor.

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 the baseline is 3, and the description adds a genuine constraint: the code must come from the user, never be guessed. The 'case does not matter' detail is left to the schema, which already documents it.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Redeems a Kleo launch code') and enumerates the recognizable examples (PRODUCTHUNT, HN, REDDIT, X, TIKTOK). This is clearly distinguishable from sibling tools like kleo_account or kleo_create_video.

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?

Gives an explicit negative constraint ('Call it only with a code the user typed, never one you guess') and an explicit follow-up route ('offer to make that film (kleo_adapt_prompt with a length of 15 seconds and product "film")'), naming sibling tools and parameters to use next.

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