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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavior beyond annotations: deleted coupons are omitted from results, and the endpoint is identified as GET /coupons.

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 tightly front-loaded: it names the resource, lists the relevant fields, notes the deletion exclusion, and ends with the endpoint. Every element is useful and there is no wasted text.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description does the important work of enumerating returned fields and disclosing the deleted-coupon exclusion. Pagination is handled in the schema, so the definition is complete enough for correct invocation, though return shape details remain minimal.

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 100%, and both limit and offset are fully documented in the schema, including default values and next_offset usage. The description adds no parameter semantics beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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 a specific verb and resource ('List discount coupons') and enumerates the key returned fields, so the agent knows exactly what this tool retrieves. It is clearly distinct from the list_* siblings by resource, though there is no coupon-specific sibling to differentiate against.

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?

Usage is implied by the list operation and by the note that deleted coupons are excluded, which is useful context. However, the description does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or mention any prerequisites.

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