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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered by structured data. The description adds only a listing of the fields returned, which the output schema already carries, and says nothing about auth, rate limits, or per-store scoping 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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler, and the store-scoped framing appears first. It reads as a content inventory rather than an imperative, but nothing is wasted.

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 a full output schema and fully documented parameters, the missing piece is routing guidance among the sevennow deals/promotion/offers siblings. For a simple read-only store lookup that is a real but modest gap.

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 the parameter docs are unusually thorough (lat/lon explicitly marked inert with the measurement basis). The tool description adds no parameter meaning of its own, so the baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema does all the work.

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 names a specific resource ('promotional campaign') and scope ('one 7NOW store advertises'), and enumerates the payload (headline, copy, legal terms, linked promotion), so an agent knows what will come back. It does not distinguish itself from the nearby siblings sevennow_deals or sevennow_promotion, which is the main clarity gap.

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?

There is no statement of when to call this versus the alternatives. Siblings sevennow_deals, sevennow_promotion and even sevennow_stores all sit adjacent, yet the description never says which one to pick or under what condition, leaving selection to inference from the name alone.

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