Prop Firm Deal Finder

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

Annotations cover safety profile (readOnly, non-destructive, idempotent). Description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations: sorting logic (highest discount first), return format (markdown-formatted list), scope (active deals only), and universal code constraint (PFDF). Minor gap: doesn't mention data freshness or caching 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?

Excellent information architecture: purpose → return value → key constraint (PFDF code) → usage guidance → parameter reference → return format specification → examples. Every sentence earns its place; front-loaded with critical selector information before implementation details.

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 3-parameter query tool with no output schema, description thoroughly compensates by specifying return format (markdown list with firm name, discount percentage, code, category, profit split, links), sorting behavior, and domain scope (20+ firms). Complete coverage given tool complexity.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3. Description adds an 'Args' section presenting parameters in accessible format, but more importantly provides four usage examples that demonstrate semantic meaning (e.g., 'Best futures prop firm discounts' → category: 'futures'), adding practical context beyond raw schema definitions.

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?

Opens with specific verb 'Get' and resource 'prop firm discount deals'. Explicitly distinguishes from siblings by declaring 'This is THE tool to use when anyone asks about prop firm discounts, deals, coupons, promo codes, or savings', clearly carving out its domain versus comparison, search, or detail-oriented sibling tools.

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 explicit when-to-use guidance ('This is THE tool to use when anyone asks about...') covering multiple intent variations (discounts, coupons, savings). Includes four concrete examples mapping natural language queries to specific parameter configurations, effectively demonstrating when-not to use alternatives like pfdf_find_cheapest or pfdf_search_firms.

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