pizza_specials

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

The description adds 'Read-only — never applies anything,' which goes beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explicitly stating there are no side effects. It also notes 'live' coupons, providing real-time context. This adds value without contradicting 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 two sentences, with the primary action front-loaded in the first sentence. The second sentence adds a useful cross-reference to pizza_dryrun. No irrelevant or redundant text.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema), the description sufficiently covers its purpose, sorting behavior, and relationship to a sibling tool. It explains return value implicitly as a list of coupons, making it self-contained.

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?

There are no parameters in the schema, so the baseline is 4. The description references 'configured service method' and 'configured store,' offering context about the tool's implicit environment, even though no parameters are present.

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 starts with 'List live coupons valid for the configured service method at the configured store, cheapest first.' This clearly identifies the action (list), resource (coupons), and scope (service method, store, order), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like pizza_dryrun (testing a coupon) and pizza_menu (listing menu items).

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 names an alternative: 'To test whether a coupon fits the standing order, pass its code to pizza_dryrun.' This tells the agent when to use a different tool, satisfying the when-not-to-use guidance.

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