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

Discloses that it counts against the plan's discount-profile cap, which is not indicated by annotations. Also states the host requirement. Annotations only provide false booleans, so description adds valuable behavioral context.

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 sentences efficiently convey purpose, usage, and constraints. First sentence front-loads the key information. No redundant or filler content.

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 moderate complexity (6 params, nested objects, no output schema), the description covers creation behavior, required fields, auth, and plan limits. It omits the return value but that is acceptable. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to decide and invoke the tool.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description explains the tiers parameter structure (ticket_class_id → percent/fixed) and groups optional params as 'max uses + schedule'. Adds meaning beyond raw schema, though individual optional params (profile_name, dates) are not detailed.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'create' and resource 'promo profile' on a live event, distinguishing it from siblings like 'create_promo_code' and 'update_promo_profile'. It explains the concept (reusable per-tier discount config) and relationship to promo codes.

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?

Provides clear context: requires event_id and tiers, and user must be a host. Implicitly distinguishes from create_promo_code by describing the profile as something codes attach to. Lacks explicit when-to-use versus alternatives exclusion, but context is strong.

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