⚠️ TrxPromo: запустить продвижение

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description's warning is consistent. It adds the dryRun parameter for safe preview, which is a useful behavioral disclosure. However, it does not detail other side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits beyond what annotations imply.

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?

Extremely concise: one line with emoji and key action. Front-loads the verb. Could benefit from structured format (e.g., purpose, params, notes) but remains readable and efficient.

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?

Given it's a destructive mutation tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description is too bare. It omits return values, error handling, idempotency behavior (though idempotencyKey param exists), and any post-condition effects. Relies heavily on external swagger documentation.

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% with descriptions for all parameters (items, dryRun, idempotencyKey). The tool description only repeats 'items' briefly; the schema provides most semantic value. Baseline 3 is appropriate since no extra meaning is added beyond 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 it launches transactional promotion for ads, with a warning emoji. It identifies the resource (ads/items) and action (запускает продвижение). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like trxpromo_cancel or promotion_* tools, missing nuance.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It references 'swagger' for details but offers no contextual hints about prerequisites, when not to use, or related tools. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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