Search thanks coupons

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

With no annotations available, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. The description only repeats the tool's name and provides no information about whether the operation is read-only, what the query does, pagination behavior, or return format. This is a complete failure of transparency.

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 short phrase, which is concise but severely under-specified. This is not effective conciseness; it omits essential information that should be present to make the tool usable.

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?

Given the tool's one flexible object parameter, no output schema, no annotations, and ambiguous relationship to sibling tools, the description is entirely inadequate. It does not enable an agent to understand the tool's purpose, usage, or expected 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?

The input schema describes a 'query' object with arbitrary keys, but the description provides zero explanation of what keys are valid, what the query means, or how it filters results. With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it does not.

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 'サンキュークーポン検索' translates to 'Thanks coupon search', which does state a specific verb (search) and resource (thanks coupons). However, it adds no new information beyond the title and does not clarify what distinguishes 'thanks coupons' from regular coupons, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like rms_search_coupons.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool instead of rms_search_coupons, rms_thanks_coupon_get, or other related coupon tools. There is no context about the intended use case.

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