sevennow_combos

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it discloses key behaviors: the tool lists every bundle, each entry contains the promotion id, and lat/lon are inert with byte-identical responses. It could go further by describing the output shape or listing edge cases, but the behavioral essentials are covered.

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?

Every sentence earns its place: purpose, distinguishing limitation, what entries contain, downstream endpoints, parameter provenance, and inert parameters. The description is dense but not bloated, and the most decision-relevant facts are front-loaded.

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 description fully explains how to obtain store_id, which params matter, what data each entry carries, and how to follow up with combo/promotion endpoints. With no output schema, it would be stronger if it described the response structure more concretely, but the agent has enough to call the tool correctly.

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%, and the schema already documents store_id provenance and the inert nature of lat/lon. The description reinforces these facts and adds downstream context, but it does not substantially expand parameter meaning beyond what the input schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 and resource ('List a 7NOW store's bundle deals') and clearly distinguishes itself: it enumerates every bundle, whereas GET /7now/search only surfaces combos on a query match. This differentiates it from sibling tools like sevennow_search, sevennow_combo, and sevennow_promotion without ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly explains when this tool is the right choice ('the only way to enumerate a store's bundles') and why the alternative search endpoint is insufficient. It also gives downstream usage — pass the promotion id to /7now/combo or /7now/promotion — and tells the user where store_id comes from.

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