Promociones ofrecidas

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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description's added value is its hint about content (eligible listings plus their discount). It does not disclose auth requirements, whether all promotions are returned when called with no args, or any rate/pagination behavior, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 efficient sentence that front-loads what the tool returns and follows with the operating hint. No padding or redundant restatement of the title.

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 read-only tool with no output schema, the description gives the shape of the return (eligible listings with discount) but omits what happens with zero arguments (all promotions?), the role of cuenta in multi-account setups, and how the result relates to accepting a promotion. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 67%: tipo and cuenta are documented in the schema, while promocion_id is bare. The description explains that promocion_id and tipo act together to select eligible listings, which adds real semantics for those two, but says nothing about cuenta and does not fill the promocion_id schema gap directly.

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?

States a specific resource (campañas y promociones que MercadoLibre le ofrece al vendedor) and the read action (lista las publicaciones elegibles con su descuento). An agent can tell this is a read/list tool for promotions, but it never names a sibling to distinguish itself from ml_aceptar_promocion, which operates on the same domain.

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?

The clause 'con promocion_id y tipo, lista las publicaciones elegibles' implies how and when to call it (to enumerate eligible listings for a given promotion/type), but there is no explicit when-to-use, no exclusions, and no reference to alternatives like ml_aceptar_promocion. Usage is inferable rather than stated.

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