get_promotion_items

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 pagination behavior and the shape of returned values, and the verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, but it never explicitly states that this is non-mutating nor mentions permission or rate-limit considerations. Adequate but with a real gap for a zero-annotation 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and outcome, followed by usage and prerequisite hints. Slightly redundant in that pagination via limit/offset and the price fields are each mentioned in both the description and the schema, but the text stays short and earns most of its space.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description correctly compensates by describing what comes back (promotional price, original price, status) and how results are paged. Auth/permission expectations are the only notable omission for a 3-parameter, single-required 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 100%, with limit, offset, and promotion_id all documented inline including ranges and defaults. The description only restates pagination and the provenance of promotion_id, adding no syntax or format detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 precise verb+resource ('List the items already participating in a specific promotion campaign') and enumerates the returned fields (promotional price, original price, status). It is clearly distinguishable from add_item_to_promotion (which enrolls items) and get_promotions (which returns campaigns).

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?

Gives explicit use cases ('check which of your items are in a campaign after adding them with add_item_to_promotion, or to audit active discounts') and names the prerequisite source for the required id ('Get the promotion_id from get_promotions'). The agent knows both when to call it and where its input comes from.

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