Creates a new voucher by specifying code, type (percentage or fixed), value, start and end dates, with optional minimum order amount, max discount, and usage limit.
Create a new voucher
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| code | Yes | ||
| type | Yes | ||
| value | Yes | ||
| min_order_amount | No | ||
| max_discount | No | ||
| start_date | Yes | ||
| end_date | Yes | ||
| usage_limit | No |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must disclose behavior. It only states 'create' with no details on side effects, authentication, rate limits, or return values. This is completely inadequate.
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 extremely short but fails to convey necessary information. It is under-specified, not genuinely concise.
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 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is vastly incomplete. It provides no context on how 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?
The input schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no explanation for any parameter. The agent cannot infer what each field means.
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 'Create a new voucher' is almost a tautology of the tool name 'bos_voucher_create'. It does not differentiate from sibling tools like bos_voucher_list or bos_voucher_validate.
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 provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description lacks any context about prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/bizino/bos-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server