cigchat_list_discount_codes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose safety and behavioral traits. It only mentions the HTTP method/endpoint and the required scope. It does not disclose return format, pagination behavior, default limits, or any side effects (though likely read-only). This is a minimal disclosure that leaves significant uncertainty about runtime behavior.

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 a single, focused sentence that immediately states the action and includes the endpoint and a security requirement. There is no filler or redundant information, and it is front-loaded with the core purpose.

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 list operation with no output schema, so the description must compensate for missing return value details. It does not explain what fields are returned, how pagination works (e.g., defaults for page and limit), or whether the 'code' parameter performs a partial or exact search. The scope requirement is helpful, but overall the context is insufficient for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage: each parameter (code, page, limit) has a description. The description adds no additional parameter details beyond the schema, so it meets the baseline of 3 but does not enhance understanding further.

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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Get list of discount codes', which clearly identifies the operation. It also includes the HTTP endpoint [GET /shop/discount-codes], and the name 'list_discount_codes' distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_info' or 'delete' for the same resource.

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 vs alternatives such as cigchat_shop_discount_codes_get_info. The description does mention a prerequisite (Manage Team scope), but this is a permission requirement, not usage context. The 'list' behavior is implied, but there is no comparison to other related tools.

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