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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds critical behavioral info: 'When a discount-config field changes, every linked promo code is re-stamped to match.' It also states the authorization requirement. This goes beyond the annotations to reveal side effects.

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 deliver purpose, editable fields, side effect, and requirements without repetition. Every sentence adds value, and the description is front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

With 8 parameters, nested objects, and no output schema, the description lacks information about the response (e.g., what is returned after update). It covers side effects and requirements but leaves the return behavior unspecified, which is a gap for a mutation 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It enumerates high-level fields (tiers, name, max uses, schedule, enabled) but does not detail the structure of the 'tiers' nested object or the exact role of 'schedule' (mapping to starts_at and expires_at). Partial mapping to 8 parameters with missing specifics.

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 verb 'Edit' and the resource 'discount profile', and lists specific fields that can be changed (tiers, name, max uses, schedule, enabled state). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like create_promo_profile or update_promo_code, but the action is distinct enough.

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 specifies required parameters (event_id, profile_id) and authorization (must be host). It implies when to use (updating an existing profile) but does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance or mention alternatives. The conditions are clear but not comprehensive.

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