GetPromotionDetailsGet detailed information about a specific bank promotion, including step-by-step tasks, hidden fees, traps, and expert recommendation. IMPORTANT: this tool returns promotion data even if it has expired — always check the IsExpired flag before recommending the promotion to a user.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| promoId | Yes | The promotion ID (from SearchPromotions results) |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, covering safety. The description adds a critical behavioral trait beyond annotations: the tool returns expired promotions and requires checking the IsExpired flag. This is valuable context for correct invocation.
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 sentences: the first clearly states purpose and content, the second conveys a critical behavioral warning in all-caps 'IMPORTANT'. Every sentence earns its place, front-loaded with the core 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?
For a simple GET-style tool with a single parameter and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and a key caveat. It mentions the IsExpired flag but does not detail the full return shape or behavior for invalid IDs. Still, it is complete enough for an agent to invoke correctly in most cases.
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?
There is only one parameter (promoId) with 100% schema coverage, including that it comes from SearchPromotions results. The description does not add extra parameter syntax or format information, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate per the guidelines.
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 action ('Get detailed information about a specific bank promotion') and lists the content returned (step-by-step tasks, hidden fees, traps, expert recommendation). It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like SearchPromotions (which lists promotions) and GetReferralCode.
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 schema notes the promoId comes from SearchPromotions results, implying a workflow of search then get details. The description also warns to check IsExpired before recommending, an important usage guideline. However, it doesn't explicitly state 'use this when' or mention alternatives/exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Each tool targets a distinct resource or action: search tools are clearly separated by product type (accounts, deposits, cards, etc.), and utility tools (calculation, bank list, referral, date) have no overlap. The relationship between SearchPromotions and GetPromotionDetails is a standard search/detail pattern that is easy to understand.
All tools follow a consistent VerbNoun PascalCase pattern (GetBanks, SearchDeposits, CalculateDepositInterest). The verbs Get, Search, and Calculate are used consistently across the set, making the intent of each tool predictable from its name.
With 13 tools, the server is well-scoped for a bank comparison platform. Each tool serves a clear purpose—covering searches for six product types, promotion management, and supporting utilities—without unnecessary bloat or missing essentials.
The tool set covers the full lifecycle of a bank offer comparison workflow: listing banks, searching all major product categories, retrieving promotion details, calculating deposit interest, obtaining referral codes, and accessing educational blog content. No obvious critical gaps are apparent for the stated purpose.