subscription_promotional_offers_create_instance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden, yet it discloses only that this is a POST (a mutation). It says nothing about required permissions/scopes, side effects, idempotency, or whether the offer becomes immediately active — all critical for a mutation endpoint with zero annotation coverage.

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 short but wastes half of itself on a verbatim parenthetical duplicate of the endpoint ('(POST /v1/subscriptionPromotionalOffers)'). It is not front-loaded with actionable content and contains no sentence that earns its place.

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?

This is a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and a nested body object whose actual fields are not described anywhere in the tool surface (the schema just says additionalProperties: {} and defers to an external OpenAPI component). An agent cannot tell from the definition alone what must go in the body or what it will get back.

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?

There is a single required body parameter at 100% schema coverage, and the schema already names the shape (components.schemas.SubscriptionPromotionalOfferCreateRequest). The description merely repeats that same pointer, adding no field-level meaning beyond the schema, which matches the baseline 3 for a fully covered parameter.

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 amounts to restating the HTTP method and path ('POST /v1/subscriptionPromotionalOffers') already encoded in the tool name, with no explanation of what a subscription promotional offer is or what creating one accomplishes. It does not distinguish this operation from sibling creation tools such as subscription_promotional_offers_get_instance or win_back_offers_create_instance.

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 given on when to use this tool, what preconditions exist (e.g. an existing subscription and available price points), or which sibling to prefer. The description offers no conditions, exclusions, or alternative routes to a create operation.

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