get_promotion_detail

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

沒有 annotations，但描述提供了足夠的行為資訊：呼叫 GET API，回傳 dict 包含特定欄位，暗示這是唯讀操作。缺少關於權限或速率限制的說明，但整體透明度良好。

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?

描述架構清晰，分為用途、API 端點、回傳結構三個部分，語言精簡且資訊充足，無冗餘。

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?

考慮到無輸出 schema，描述明確列出了回傳欄位；參數只有一個且已說明來源； siblings 眾多但描述指出與 list/search 搭配使用，情境完整。

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?

單一參數 promotion_id 在 scheme 中已有完整描述（從 list_promotions 或 search_promotions 取得），描述僅重複此訊息，未增加新意義。根據規則，schema_coverage 100% 時 baseline 3，因此分數合理。

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?

明確指出這個工具用來取得單一促銷活動的完整詳情，包括折扣規則、適用商品等。與 sibling tools（如 list_promotions, search_promotions）區分，因為它需要已知的 promotion_id 來取得所有欄位。

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?

描述中明確說明『適合在已知 promotion_id 的情況下取得所有欄位』，並暗示應先使用 list_promotions 或 search_promotions 取得 ID，提供了使用時機與前提。

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