Get a promotion

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safe read-only nature is known. The description adds value by disclosing that the response includes approval status and item-level issues, which is behavioral detail beyond the annotations.

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?

A single concise sentence that leads with the action and resource, then adds the key purpose and return details. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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?

There is no output schema, so the description carries the burden of explaining what is returned. It mentions promotionStatus and itemLevelIssues, which covers the most important return aspects for the stated use case. It does not describe the full response structure, but given the tool's simplicity and annotations, it is sufficient.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (account and promotion). The description does not add extra parameter syntax or format details; it only references the promotion ID implicitly. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema fully documents parameters.

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 uses a specific verb ('Returns') and clearly identifies the resource ('one promotion'). It also names key return fields (promotionStatus, per-destination approval, itemLevelIssues), distinguishing it from list_promotions and insert_promotion.

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 explicitly states the intended use case: 'the place to check whether a freshly inserted promotion was approved.' This gives clear context for when to call it, though it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternative tools like list_promotions.

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