List discounts

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

The annotations already state readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is established. The description adds a small amount of scope ('configured on the account') but does not explain behavioral aspects such as pagination, inclusion of deleted discounts, or the meaning of the openWorldHint/idempotentHint annotations. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

The description is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler: it states the action, the resource, and the scope. Every word earns its place.

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 basic invocation, the description is adequate: no required parameters, and the read-only annotations cover the safety context. However, the tool accepts six optional filters, has no output schema, and the description does not mention response shape, filtering semantics, or whether deleted discounts appear, so it is not fully complete for nuanced use.

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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema for the six parameters. Two parameters (`discount_ids`, `show_deleted`) lack schema descriptions, and the description does not compensate for them or clarify filtering behavior. Schema coverage of 67% is not high enough to offset this gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('discounts'), with an account-level scope ('configured on the account'). It is immediately distinguishable from the sibling write tool `loyverse_upsert_discount`, so an agent can tell this is the read-only lookup.

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 about when to prefer this tool over alternatives, no mention of the write sibling `loyverse_upsert_discount`, and no conditions or exclusions. The only usage signal is implied by the verb 'List', which is not enough guidance.

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