cigchat_shop_discount_codes_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the required 'Manage Team' scope and the HTTP method, which is useful transparency. However, it does not mention idempotency, partial vs full update semantics, or response format, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 concise sentences: one for purpose and endpoint, one for auth requirement. Every word earns its place, no redundancy or filler.

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?

With 14 parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description provides only auth context. It is minimally viable because the schema covers parameter names and examples, but it lacks critical behavior details like whether unspecified fields are retained or reset, and what the return value looks like.

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 description does not discuss parameters, but schema coverage is high (93%) with example values for most fields. The examples hint at allowed values (e.g., type: percentage, amount, free_shipping), but the description adds no additional meaning 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?

Description clearly states 'Update discount code' with the PUT endpoint, distinguishing it from create/delete/get siblings. It identifies the specific resource and action with no ambiguity.

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 implies usage (use when you need to update an existing discount code) but does not explicitly state when not to use or list alternatives like create/delete. The auth requirement provides some context but no exclusions or alternative tool references.

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