meli_item_promotions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add value by saying the result includes both candidate and existing promotions with prices and status, which tells the agent what kind of data to expect, but it says nothing about permission requirements or result volume.

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?

A single compact sentence with no redundant restatement of the tool name, and the key scope qualifier (candidatas y existentes) appears early. Nothing to trim, though nothing is front-loaded beyond the verb either.

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?

For a one-parameter read-only lookup with no output schema, the description is close to sufficient: it names the resource, the scope of promotions returned, and the payload contents (precios y estado). Only ambiguity about how to disambiguate it from sibling promotion tools remains.

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 0%, so the description would ideally explain item_id, and it does not. However, item_id is a single, self-evident MELI identifier and the description at least scopes it ('del ítem'), so this is a moderate gap rather than a serious one.

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?

States a specific verb (consulta), a specific resource (promociones del ítem) and scope (candidatas y existentes, con precios y estado). It is clear enough to distinguish from list-level siblings, though it never names meli_promotion_items or meli_seller_promotions to disambiguate seller-level vs item-level promotion tools.

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?

There is no when-to-use / when-not-to-use guidance and no mention of the obvious alternatives (meli_promotion_items, meli_seller_promotions). The agent must infer the usage context purely from the name and the phrase 'del ítem'.

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