listCoupons

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is read-only, specifies the GET method, states a concrete rate limit (100 requests per 1m), and clarifies scope. It does not mention pagination or return shape, but the included operational details go well beyond a minimal definition.

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 action and resource, then appends the rate limit and endpoint info in parentheticals. There is no filler or redundant text; every element contributes to correct invocation.

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 no-parameter list operation, the description adequately covers scope, read-only behavior, method, and rate limiting. It does not explicitly describe pagination or the exact return payload, but given the low complexity and absence of an output schema, the definition is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke 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?

The tool has zero parameters, so parameter semantics are trivially satisfied. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description's scoping explanation ('on the connected account') adds useful context even though no schema parameters exist.

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 uses a specific verb, 'List', and a clear resource, 'Stripe coupons', with a scoping phrase, 'on the connected account'. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling list tools like listPayouts and listSubscriptions, without needing to open schemas.

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 context: the tool lists Stripe coupons belonging to the connected account. No sibling tool targets the same resource, so when-to-use is easily inferred. It lacks explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance, but the resource specificity makes that a minor omission.

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