add_item_to_promotion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden well: it discloses that this is a REAL write operation, that Meli approval is required, and that approval causes the item to sell at the promotional price for the campaign duration. It stops short of covering permissions/auth scopes, rate limits, or whether a submission can be withdrawn.

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?

Well front-loaded — the write-operation warning appears in the first clause, then the flow, then the return info. Dense but each sentence carries distinct information; the tool's resource name is partly restated in the opening.

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?

Without annotations or an output schema, the description supplies the side-effect model, the sequencing with get_promotions, and a brief note on the return value (item id and status). It could say more about rejection/error handling, but nothing critical is missing for correct invocation.

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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by stating that deal_price must fall within the campaign's allowed range. It does not explain the optional top_deal_price, which the schema already documents.

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+resource ('Submit one of your items to a promotion campaign') and clarifies it is a real write operation rather than a lookup. An agent can distinguish it from get_promotions and get_promotion_items without opening either schema.

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?

Explicitly prescribes the workflow and prerequisites: call get_promotions to find a 'candidate' campaign first, then pass a deal_price within the campaign's allowed range, and confirm the price with the user before calling. Nothing about when to use it is left to inference.

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