list_discounts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the list semantics, available filters, and pagination. It does not mention permissions, rate limits, response shape, or ordering, but for a straightforward list operation these omissions are not critical.

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 a concise, front-loaded statement that avoids redundancy. It names the resource, workspace scope, filters, and pagination in a compact form, though 'code search' could be slightly clearer.

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?

The tool has five optional parameters and no output schema or annotations. The description covers filters and pagination but omits what fields are returned, default limit/offset semantics, and any ordering or visibility caveats, leaving some operational ambiguity for an agent.

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 description coverage is only 20% (only search is documented), so the description must compensate. It groups parameters semantically ('enabled, type, or a code search; paginated'), which helps, but it does not flesh out limit/offset behavior or the type enum beyond what the schema already provides.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and resource ('discount codes') and scopes it to the workspace. This clearly distinguishes it from singular retrieval tools like get_discount and mutation tools like create_discount or update_discount.

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 description conveys a clear read/query use case: list workspace discounts with optional filtering and pagination. However, it never explicitly routes the agent to get_discount for a single discount or states when listing would be inappropriate, so the guidance is implied rather than explicit.

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