keepa_analyze_promo_impact

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the behavior of comparing time periods and measuring lift, but it does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only or if any side effects exist. Since 'analyze' implies a safe read, the description adds some context but lacks full behavioral disclosure.

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 concise sentences that front-load the action and metric. Every word earns its place without filler or repetition. The structure is clean and easily scannable.

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 has 5 optional parameters, two modes (promo_id vs. ASIN/domain/date range), and no output schema. The description does not explain the output format, how lift is calculated, or which parameter combination should be used. This is incomplete given the tool's analytical complexity and lack of structured output reference.

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 the schema already documents all five parameters. The description does not add new parameter-specific meaning, but it does mention 'promo period' which relates to start_date/end_date and promo_id. This aligns with the baseline score of 3 for high schema coverage.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Overlay a promo with rank/price data to measure lift' and specifies the comparative method. This distinguishes it from siblings like keepa_list_promos or keepa_get_price_history, as it focuses on analyzing promo impact rather than listing or fetching raw data.

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 usage context: analyze a promo by comparing before, during, and after periods. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or provide exclusions, such as 'use keepa_get_price_history for raw price data instead.'

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