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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses key behaviors: promotions are TDU-aware for electricity, returns active promotions with discount details and expiration dates, and that calling without an address returns a generic list that may include un-buyable offers.

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 well-structured, starting with purpose, then usage examples, then behavioral details, and finally parameter guidance. It is slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value, and the information is front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description covers all essential aspects: what it returns, filtering options, address importance, and the TDU-aware behavior. It is complete for the agent to use correctly.

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%, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining how filtering with utility_types or provider_slugs narrows results, and emphasizing the importance of passing the address for accurate offers.

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 retrieves current deals, coupons, and exclusive offers for utilities at a Texas address. It gives specific verb-resource combinations ('get current deals') and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'compare_providers' or 'initiate_signup' by focusing solely on promotional offers.

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 provides explicit scenarios for use, such as when the user asks for the cheapest electricity deal or wants a coupon before signing up. It also advises on calling with or without an address, though it does not explicitly state when not to use the tool.

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