Thinkific MCP Server

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it creates promotions. It doesn't disclose behavioral traits like required permissions, whether promotions are immediately active, what happens on creation failure, rate limits, or response format. 'Create' implies mutation but lacks detail about the operation's 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 perfectly concise with two sentences that each earn their place: the first states the core purpose, the second provides workflow guidance. No wasted words, front-loaded with the essential action.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the basic purpose and workflow relationship but lacks details about behavioral aspects, error conditions, or what the tool returns. The 100% schema coverage helps, but more behavioral context would be needed for completeness.

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 all 7 parameters thoroughly. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema, establishing the baseline score of 3 where 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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Create a new promotion (discount)' with the specific verb 'Create' and resource 'promotion'. It distinguishes from siblings like 'create_coupon' by explaining promotions hold coupon codes, but doesn't explicitly contrast with 'update_promotion' or 'delete_promotion'.

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 about workflow: 'Create a promotion first, then create coupons under it.' This gives guidance on when to use this tool in relation to 'create_coupon', but doesn't explicitly mention when NOT to use it or alternatives like 'update_promotion'.

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