wb_promotions_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It lists the type of data returned but does not explain how multiple promotion_ids are handled, what the response envelope looks like, whether any side effects occur, or any other operational behavior.

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 a single compact sentence that front-loads the core purpose and then lists key fields. The Russian parenthetical 'детали акции' is mildly redundant but does not significantly hurt clarity.

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 the simple input schema and no output schema, the tool lives in a large family of promotion tools, and the description is too thin to orient an agent. It does not explain when to invoke it, what to pass, or what the returned structure will look like.

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 0%, so the description must compensate for the undocumented promotion_ids parameter. It does not mention the parameter at all, how to use it, what constitutes a valid promotion ID, or what happens when multiple IDs are provided. The schema only gives the basic type, leaving the agent without meaningful parameter guidance.

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 identifies a specific resource ('promotion details') and enumerates the returned fields (dates, conditions, slots, participationPercentage, advantages, type), which makes the tool's purpose clear. However, it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'fetch', and the parenthetical 'детали акции' merely repeats the tool name.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus the many sibling promotion tools such as wb_promotions_list, wb_promotions_products, or wb_promotions_audit. The context for use is only implied by the tool name and field list, with no exclusions or alternatives mentioned.

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