pointsbet_promo_code

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so the bar is lower. The description adds value by revealing the return shape ({info, image}) and explicitly stating 'Auth: none needed,' which are behavioral details not present in 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?

The description is compact: one purpose sentence, a return type line, an example block, and an auth note. Every line serves a distinct purpose with no redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, it includes the input example, return type, and auth requirement. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without needing additional information.

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% and already provides an example ('WELCOME') and states the parameter is part of the URL path. The tool description merely repeats the same example in its own format, adding no new semantic information. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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: 'Sign-up splash content (info text + hero image) for a named promo code.' It identifies the resource (named promo code) and distinguishes this tool from siblings like pointsbet_promotions or pointsbet_content_call by scoping it to sign-up splash content.

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 gives clear context: it is for a named promo code, and the example shows a direct invocation. It does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives, so it is a clear context without exclusions rather than full guidance.

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