cigchat_shop_discount_codes_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds one useful fact: the required 'Manage Team' scope on the token. However, it does not disclose side effects, return values, idempotency, or that the resource is a discount code (it incorrectly says 'tag'). This is insufficient for a create operation with 13 parameters.

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 very short (one sentence), but it is not effective. The phrase 'Create new tag' is actively harmful misinformation, and although the endpoint and scope are useful, the overall structure does not present information clearly or accurately. A concise description that contains a critical error does not earn its place.

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 complex tool with 13 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description only provides the wrong resource name, an endpoint, and a scope requirement. It does not explain the discount code domain, required fields beyond what is in the schema, or how this operation fits with sibling tools. The description is largely inadequate for an agent to safely and correctly invoke this 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 description coverage is 92%, so the baseline is 3 even though the description adds no parameter information. The schema itself provides examples for most parameters, which helps the agent. However, the description's misleading 'tag' label may cause incorrect interpretation of parameter meanings (e.g., 'type' could be misread). No additional parameter insight is given 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 explicitly says 'Create new tag', but the tool endpoint is /shop/discount-codes/create, indicating it actually creates discount codes. This is misleading and directly contradicts the tool's name and endpoint. It fails to identify the correct resource, so it cannot help an agent understand what this tool does.

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 guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it is the create operation among discount code tools, nor does it distinguish from related tools like cigchat_shop_discount_codes_update or cigchat_service_discount_codes_get_info. The only extra context is the required 'Manage Team' scope, which is not a usage guideline.

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