Promotion: list orders

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

Annotations already cover readOnly, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint. The description adds context about being read-only (no money spent) and pagination behavior (first page returned if omitted), which goes beyond the annotations.

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?

Two sentences: first states function and output fields, second provides usage guidance and alternatives. Every sentence is essential, no 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?

Despite no output schema, the description lists returned fields, declares read-only nature, explains pagination, and references sibling tool for deeper detail. Sufficient for a simple listing tool.

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 has 100% coverage for the single pagination parameter. The description adds that pagination can be omitted (first page returned) and notes camelCase field name, providing extra value beyond 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 verb 'Returns', the resource 'paginated list of the current user's promotion orders', and specifies the fields (id, createdAt, status). It also distinguishes itself from sibling tool promotion_get_order_status_v1.

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 explicitly says 'READ-ONLY: spends NO money' and advises using this for order history/overview, with a pointer to the sibling tool for detailed status. It also mentions pagination can be omitted.

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