dw_product_bulk_discount

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the tool modifies prices in-place (destructive) and returns old/new values. However, it lacks details on permissions required, reversibility, or potential side effects, which would be beneficial for full transparency.

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 concise with two sentences and no extraneous information. It front-loads the action ('Apply a percentage discount') and efficiently covers targeting and return behavior.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema and annotations, the description covers the main aspects of the tool: purpose, targeting, and return values. It could be more complete by mentioning potential defaults or caveats, but overall it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool.

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 high (83%), with most parameters documented. The description adds context beyond the schema by explaining that the discount applies to DefaultPrice, that groupId and productIds are alternative targeting methods, and that the output includes old and new prices. This adds meaningful semantics.

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 applies a percentage discount to DefaultPrice across a set of products, modifying the base price in-place. It specifies two targeting options (groupId or productIds) and indicates it returns per-product old/new prices. This distinguishes it from sibling tools, none of which perform bulk discounting.

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 provides clear guidance on when to use the tool: for applying discounts to multiple products either by group or by explicit IDs. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient for an agent to decide.

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