Promotions Create

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

Annotations already declare readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=false and openWorld=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-schema context — required scope write_discounts and API version 2025-03 — but says nothing about what happens after creation (e.g., whether the promotion goes live immediately, or how non-idempotency manifests).

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?

Four short lines, front-loaded with the action, then endpoint, scope and version. No filler whatsoever.

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?

The sole required parameter is an opaque anyOf object with no enumerated properties, and the description defers all structure to an external "Discount API reference" that is not included. For a create tool with no output schema, the agent is given no way to construct a valid body — the one thing the description most needed to address.

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% and the single parameter already documents itself as "Promotion definition (name, type, conditions, benefits...) per the API reference". The description's "Body per the Discount API reference" merely restates that pointer without adding field-level meaning.

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 and resource ("Create an automatic cart/catalog promotion"), and the qualifier "automatic" implicitly separates it from code-based coupon tools among the many siblings. It does not explicitly name the alternatives, but the resource being created is unambiguous.

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 required scope (write_discounts) and the word "automatic" imply when this applies, but the description never states when to use this versus tiendanube_coupons_create or tiendanube_discounts_callbacks_upsert, nor any prerequisites. Usage is inferable, not stated.

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