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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses key behaviors: the action is cosmetic only, non-destructive (coupon still exists at operator, re-redeemable), and free. This provides clear expectations beyond the input 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?

Two concise sentences: first states the action, second adds essential context (cosmetic, free, requirement). No waste; front-loaded with purpose.

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 removal action, the description covers effect and constraints. The output schema exists (not shown) and likely specifies return values, so completeness is high. Minor gap: doesn't explicitly state that the coupon disappears from the list immediately.

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 input schema has 3 parameters with 0% coverage. The description explains 'npub' (proof required) and implies 'coupon_id' (the coupon to remove), but does not mention 'dpop_token'. While it adds some meaning, it leaves one parameter unexplained, resulting in moderate compensation.

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 'Remove a coupon from this patron's redemption list,' which is a specific verb and resource. It also adds 'cosmetic only' to distinguish from permanent deletion, helping differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_coupon' and 'redeem_coupon'.

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 states when to use ('remove from redemption list'), what happens instead ('cosmetic only'), and alternatives implied (permanent deletion via sibling tools). Also notes prerequisites: 'requires proof of npub' and that it's free, guiding agent on conditions.

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