ebay_get_promotions

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers safety, and the description's 'Get' is consistent with it. But the description adds no behavioral context beyond naming the API—no indication of pagination, list response shape, filtering semantics, or required scope. With zero extra behavioral disclosure, the annotation carries the entire burden.

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 sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. It is terse to the point of being thin on content, but structurally it wastes nothing.

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 tool with seven parameters, no output schema, and a large sibling family in the promotions domain, one sentence is insufficient. It leaves the agent uninformed about how marketplaceId, promotionType, and promotionStatus combine, what result set to expect, and when to prefer this over ebay_get_item_promotion or ebay_get_promotion_reports.

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%, so the schema already documents each parameter's existence and optionality. The description adds no semantic meaning beyond what the schema states, and the parameter descriptions themselves are tautological ('q optional endpoint parameter'). Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 names a specific verb and resource: 'Get promotions' and identifies the API domain ('eBay Marketing API'). This distinguishes it from more targeted sibling tools like ebay_get_item_promotion and ebay_get_item_price_markdown_promotion. However, it does not explicitly differentiate itself from promotion report or summary-report siblings.

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?

No guidance is given about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ebay_get_item_promotion, ebay_get_promotion_reports, or ebay_get_promotion_summary_report. The description provides no inclusion/exclusion criteria or mention of required marketplace context.

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