promotion_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden. It never confirms the call is read-only, says nothing about behavior for unknown or malformed ids, auth needs, or limits on how many ids can be supplied. The only genuinely useful disclosure is the comma-separated input convention.

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 short sentence with the key input convention front-loaded and no filler. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than tight editing.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but with zero annotations and near-zero schema coverage the description should have covered read-only nature, id format, and routing versus promotion_detail. It does none of these, leaving an agent to guess on a one-parameter batch lookup 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 0% — the schema only gives a string type and the title 'Promotion Ids'. The description adds real meaning by stating the parameter is a comma-separated list, which the schema does not. It still omits id format, example values, and any batch-size guidance, so it only partially compensates.

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?

The description states a resource ('promotion ids') and implies a batch lookup, which loosely separates it from the singular sibling promotion_detail and the list sibling promotions. However, 'Details for...' is a weak verb phrase and never explicitly says it returns promotion records for the given ids, so the agent must infer the operation.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus promotion_detail, promotions, or weekend_promotions, all of which appear in the sibling list. The only implicit cue is 'comma-separated list', which suggests batch use, but no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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