Aceptar promoción

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

readOnlyHint=false already declares a write, and the description adds genuinely useful behavioral context beyond that: the change is buyer-visible ('Visible para compradores') and tied to a specific price, signalling real-world impact. It does not cover reversibility or failure behavior, but the visibility warning is meaningful additional disclosure.

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?

Two tight sentences, front-loaded with the action verb and impact, then the constraint. No filler. Slightly terse – it leaves no room to explain account selection or outcomes – but nothing is wasted.

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 mutation that makes a price-promotion publicly visible, the description covers purpose, price and confirmation but omits failure behavior, reversibility, and how cuenta affects multi-account setups. With no output schema and 60% parameter coverage, a few more specifics would make it complete.

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 coverage is 60%, so the schema documents tipo, cuenta and precio_final while item_id and promocion_id are bare. The description adds only the 'al precio indicado' reference, loosely mapping to precio_final, and nothing beyond the schema for the undocumented parameters. Baseline 3 is warranted.

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?

Specific verb (ACTIVA) plus resource (una publicación dentro de una promoción) and the price context. An agent can distinguish this action tool from the listing sibling ml_promociones without opening the schema. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling as the read counterpart, so it is strong but not maximally differentiated.

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?

Provides a real usage condition – 'usar solo con confirmación explícita por ítem' – which effectively gates invocation and functions as a when-to-use guard rail. It does not, however, name alternatives or state when-not beyond the confirmation requirement. Clear context without explicit alternatives.

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