list_promotions

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the return structure (dict with total_found, returned, items containing specific fields) and implies a read-only operation via the GET API. It does not discuss rate limits, authentication needs, or potential side effects, but the return detail is adequate.

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 well-structured with sections (用途, 呼叫的 API, 回傳結構), each sentence adds value, and it is concise without extraneous information.

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 has only 2 parameters, no output schema, and no nested objects, the description adequately covers the return structure and API endpoint, providing enough context for an AI agent to use the tool effectively.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'supports filtering by status' which adds minimal value beyond the schema's parameter description. No additional insights are provided for 'max_results'.

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 it lists promotions with status filtering, and includes the return structure. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling 'search_promotions' tool, which could have overlapping functionality.

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 '用途' section provides clear context: browse promotions to understand their statuses, analyze strategies, and obtain promotion IDs for further detail queries. It does not, however, mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like 'search_promotions'.

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