create_discount_position

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

Annotations indicate it is a read-write operation (readOnlyHint=false), but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the literal action. It does not disclose side effects, required existing entities, or any constraints, leaving the annotation and schema to carry the full burden.

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 a single concise sentence with no redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the verb and object. It is appropriately short for the statement of purpose, though it lacks detail.

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 5 parameters, no output schema, and only partial parameter descriptions, the description is far from complete. It does not explain the document relationship, the meaning of a discount position, or how the parameters interact, making it insufficient for reliable invocation without additional knowledge.

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 40% (only document_id and kb_document_type are described), leaving text, value, and is_percentual undocumented. The description does not clarify these parameters or how they should be set for a discount position, providing no additional semantics beyond the tool name.

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 (create) on a specific resource (discount position), which distinguishes it from sibling tools for other position types. However, it is essentially a restatement of the tool name and does not explain what a discount position is or how it differs from other position types.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as update_discount_position or create_item_position. There is no mention of prerequisites, document context, or scenarios where this should be used.

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