Show discount code

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true; the description's 'Changes nothing' corroborates but does not extend that. It adds useful return-content context (limits, buyer count) but says nothing about permissions, the business-scoping behavior, or rate 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?

Front-loaded and short, but the first and second sentences substantially repeat the same idea ('what it takes off... how many used it' restated as 'what it takes off, its limits, and how many buyers used it'), which is redundant rather than additive.

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 no output schema, the description does cover the return payload, and the read-only nature is covered by annotations. It is nearly complete for a simple lookup, with the only gap being the business/act-as parameter's behavior.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description only confirms 'by id' and never mentions the business parameter's act-on-behalf semantics, so it adds little beyond the schema baseline.

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?

States a specific verb (show) and resource (one discount code by id) and characterizes what is returned: discount amount, limits, and usage count. The singular 'one... by id' cleanly distinguishes it from the sibling list/create/archive discount tools.

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?

Usage is implied by 'by id' – an agent can infer this is the single-record lookup versus agenta_discounts_list. However, no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or named alternatives are given.

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