list_discounts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds a valuable behavioral constraint beyond annotations: every call returns no_permission without Gryzzly's budget offer. It does not describe pagination or rate limits, but those are partly covered by the schema.

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 and front-loads the purpose before usage, alternatives, and caveats. The standalone 'Read-only.' sentence repeats the readOnlyHint annotation and slightly reduces the otherwise efficient structure.

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?

For a read-only list tool with a full input schema, an output schema, and annotations, the description covers purpose, sibling differentiation, permission prerequisites, and filtering behavior. Return values and pagination details are handled by the output schema and input schema respectively, so nothing essential is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all four parameters. The description says filters accept project and task names, codes or ids, which largely mirrors the schema descriptions and adds no new syntax or defaults beyond what is already structured.

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 verb and resource ('List discounts') and clarifies the domain object as amounts taken off a project's or task's budget. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling get_discount and names what is returned ('their names and amounts').

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?

Gives explicit when-to-use guidance ('audit what was granted on a project') and names the alternative ('use get_discount when you already hold one discount id'). It also states the prerequisite for any successful call ('Without Gryzzly's budget offer every call answers no_permission'), leaving little to inference.

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