migros_list_promotions

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and usefully discloses the ordering ('best discount first') and an important semantic caveat about money_discount_pct being a loyalty discount rather than a price cut. It does not explicitly state read-only safety or rate/permission behavior, which prevents a 5.

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 short and front-loads the core purpose, ordering, and caveat. The 'see the server instructions' reference is compact, though it relies on external context rather than being self-contained.

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 a simple two-parameter list tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, ordering, and discount semantics adequately. However, with no annotations and zero schema descriptions, it leaves gaps around the limit parameter and read-only/permission behavior.

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%, so the description must compensate. It provides helpful query examples ('süt', 'çay', 'deterjan') but gives no meaning for the limit parameter beyond the schema default of 10.

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 specific resource and filter: discounted products for a keyword, sorted best discount first. It distinguishes promotions from general product search implicitly, but does not name the sibling tool it replaces.

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?

Usage is implied by 'discounted products for a keyword', but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this instead of migros_search_products or migros_price_stats. No exclusions or alternatives are named.

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