get_premium_promo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering the safety profile. The description adds minimal behavioral content (only that it includes 'features, prices') but does not disclose details like return format, localization, or any side effects. Since annotations carry most of the transparency burden, a 3 is appropriate.

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 extremely compact—a single short phrase with no filler words. It is front-loaded and every word adds value (promo material, features, prices). Conciseness is exemplary.

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 parameterless, read-only tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description, while minimal, covers the basic semantics (what the promo material contains). It could be improved by adding a verb and clarifying the return behavior, but given the low complexity, the current level is nearly adequate.

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 has 0 parameters with 100% coverage, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description does not need to elaborate on parameters, and the baseline for 0 parameters is 4.

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 is a noun phrase ('Промо-материал Telegram Premium (фичи, цены)') that names the resource and its content (features, prices) but lacks a verb specifying the action. The tool name 'get_premium_promo' implies retrieval, but the description itself is vague and does not explicitly state that it returns the promo material.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of context, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description only gives a static phrase with no actionable direction.

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