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

Annotations supply readOnlyHint=true, so the safe-read profile is already covered. The description adds the underlying REST route (GET /v2/products/{product_id}/offer_codes/{id}), which is useful orientation but discloses nothing about auth needs, error behavior (e.g. missing id), or rate limits.

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 short sentences, no filler, with the purpose front-loaded and the REST mapping as supporting detail. Every clause earns its place.

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 two-parameter read with full schema coverage and a readOnly annotation, the description covers what an agent needs to call it. Only the absence of any not-found/error note keeps it from being fully complete.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description's path template clarifies how id nests under product_id, but adds no format or constraint detail beyond that. Baseline 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb+resource: 'Get a single offer code on a product by id.' The word 'single' implicitly distinguishes it from gumroad_list_offer_codes, though the sibling is never named. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

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 only implied by 'single' as opposed to the list sibling. There is no explicit statement of when to reach for this tool versus gumroad_list_offer_codes or gumroad_get_product, and no prerequisites are given.

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