insumer_acp_discount

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

Without annotations, the description discloses return format, credit cost, and relationship to insumer_verify. However, it does not explicitly state read-only nature or side effects, leaving minor gaps.

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?

Three sentences, each adding value: purpose, return details, and context (verification, cost). No wasted words. Front-loaded.

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?

Explains return format despite no output schema, mentions credit cost and sibling relation. Lacks explicit guidance on wallet field mutual exclusivity, but covers essential aspects.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no new parameter meaning beyond repeating that items are optional, which is already in the schema.

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 checks discount eligibility in ACP format, returns specific objects (coupons, applied/rejected arrays, per-item allocations), and distinguishes itself from siblings like insumer_verify by specifying ACP wrapping.

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 implies use for ACP checkout flows and contrasts with insumer_verify. It mentions credit cost but does not explicitly state when not to use or list all alternatives.

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