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

The annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context (e.g., no mention of side effects, but there are none). It does not contradict 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 redundant, containing the same sentence twice. This is not concise and adds no value; the second sentence is an exact duplicate. It should have been a single, clear statement.

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 simple paginated list tool, the description gives the basic purpose but omits any hint of return format or edge cases. Given the lack of an output schema, a bit more detail on what is returned would improve completeness, but it is adequate for a straightforward list.

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?

The schema already provides descriptive parameter names and per-parameter descriptions (page, per_page). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the tool lists promocodes based on dedicated collections, but the term 'dedicated collections' is vague and the repeated sentence adds no clarity. It does not explicitly say it returns a list, but the intent is understandable.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus the sibling promocode listing tools (e.g., shop_list_promocodes_amount, shop_list_promocodes_product). The description does not differentiate the use case.

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