优惠券列表

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

Annotations already cover the safe read-only and idempotent nature of the tool. The description adds useful context beyond that: the query is scoped to the current account's available coupons and the returned id is meant to be passed to conpon_id. It does not mention pagination or full response shape, but that is minor given the annotations and low complexity.

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?

Two short sentences carry all the essential information: purpose, scope, usage, and filter dimensions. It is front-loaded and contains no filler.

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 read-only list endpoint with two fully documented enum parameters, the description provides enough to invoke it correctly: what it returns conceptually, how the result is used, and what filtering applies. The only omission is response shape details beyond the id, but the description still names the critical output field.

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 both parameters have detailed enum descriptions. The description's phrase '按套餐类型与计费模式筛选' largely restates the schema rather than adding new semantic detail; the '不用 product' note is a small clarification but not essential because additionalProperties is false.

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 (查询/query) against a specific resource (当前账号可用的优惠券), and clarifies that the returned id is used as conpon_id in orders or renewals. This clearly distinguishes it from the order_* sibling tools and avoids tautology.

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?

It explicitly says to use the tool when placing an order or renewing, and notes that filtering is done by package type and billing mode, with no product parameter needed. There are no coupon-related sibling tools to contrast against, so the clear context is sufficient, though no explicit alternative is named.

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