get_promotion

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds genuinely new behavioral context: product lists are truncated and returned as counts plus the first product_limit entries. It does not cover behavior when the ID is unknown, but the truncation disclosure is the important signal.

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?

A single dense sentence whose most important fact – it returns one promotion – is front-loaded, with the truncation caveat in parentheses. Slightly fragmentary, but no wasted words.

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?

With an output schema present, return details need not be spelled out, and the description still tells the agent the response is a hybrid of full nested data and truncated lists. The main gap is the undocumented include_products parameter.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It clearly explains the effect of product_limit on each product list, but says nothing about include_products (a toggle that changes response shape) or the expected format of promotion_id.

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?

States a specific resource (a single promotion) and enumerates what comes back: rules, promo codes, and applicable products. The singular framing implicitly contrasts with list_promotions, though the sibling is never named.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to call this versus list_promotions or search tools, and no preconditions or exclusions. The only cue is the implied need for a promotion_id.

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