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

The description adds useful behavioral context beyond the read-only and idempotent annotations: it defines exactly what counts as a discount, states the sort order, and explains why permanent markdowns are excluded. This meaningfully helps an agent interpret results.

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 two sentences with no wasted words. The core function and sort order are front-loaded, and the important definitional clarification follows naturally.

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?

The tool is simple, read-only, and has an output schema, so the description covers the core deal semantics well. However, the lack of guidance for the undocumented category parameter and how limit/sort combine leaves an agent with some ambiguity when invoking the tool with filters.

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 only 25%, with only ending_within_days described. The description does not explain sim, limit, or category parameters, nor does it clarify what values category accepts or how the filter interacts with the sort. The discount definition is useful domain context but not parameter-level guidance.

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 what the tool returns: add-ons currently discounted, sorted by discount depth. It is specific enough to distinguish itself from generic search and price tools, though it does not explicitly name siblings or contrast itself with them.

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 implies when to use the tool: when the agent needs currently discounted add-ons rather than permanent markdowns. It gives a clear exclusion ('permanent markdowns do not appear') but does not mention alternative tools or provide explicit when-to-use guidance.

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