create_promo_rule

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

Annotations are all false, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that promo_rule_id is client-supplied and describes the return object. However, it does not discuss idempotency or error behavior on duplicate IDs, which would be useful for a mutation tool.

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 concise and well-structured: a brief purpose statement, follow-up on related tools, pattern examples, a clean list of parameters with short explanations, and a return object description. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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's complexity (11 parameters, 6 required) and zero schema description, the description covers all necessary details: parameter semantics, common use patterns, and return format. The presence of an output schema supports completeness further.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description adds significant meaning by explaining each parameter with examples and valid ranges (e.g., amount for percentage, target options). This goes beyond the raw schema and provides actionable guidance.

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 the tool creates a promo rule (discount mechanic) and distinguishes it from the create_promo_code sibling by noting that codes are attached afterwards. This provides a specific verb+resource and differentiates from alternatives.

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 gives clear context for use (creating a promo rule first, then attaching codes via create_promo_code) and provides common pattern examples. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent.

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