claim_coupon

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

With no annotations, the description lists side effects (binding, visibility, errors, per-customer limit) and notes it's a write operation, but lacks details on idempotency, reversibility, or rate limits.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections and front-loaded purpose, but some redundancy (e.g., [WRITE] is evident from side effects). Overall efficient for a mutation tool.

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?

Despite lacking output schema, the description explains the return structure and side effects, covering key behavioral aspects. It could be more detailed on error handling, but sufficient for a simple claim operation.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for the only parameter, and the description does not add significant new information beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states verb 'claim' and resource 'coupon' in the title and description, and distinguishes from sibling tools like 'redeem_coupon' and 'send_coupon' by specifying that it binds the coupon to a customer account.

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?

Provides context for suitable scenarios (redemption code, API integration) but does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives. The difference from 'redeem_coupon' is not addressed.

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