Offers and subscription

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

The annotations already declare read-only, idempotent, open-world, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds useful context beyond those annotations by stating what is listed, what campaign fields appear, that subscription plans grant unlimited course access for a period, and that prices are in Toman. It does not mention rate limits, ordering, or authentication needs.

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 front-loaded with the resource being listed, followed by useful return-detail context, currency, and an explicit alternative. Every sentence earns its place and there is no filler.

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 zero-parameter, read-only listing tool with no output schema, the description supplies enough context: what records are returned, what campaign fields exist, what subscription plans mean, and the currency. The annotations already cover safety behavior, and the sibling redirect handles live course pricing.

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?

There are zero input parameters, so there is no schema parameter semantics to compensate for; the baseline for a no-parameter tool is 4. The description appropriately does not spend space explaining arguments.

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 uses a specific verb, 'list', and names the exact resources: discount campaigns, public coupon codes, and subscription plans. It clearly distinguishes this tool from the sibling fr_course by explaining that fr_course shows live course sale pricing.

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?

It tells an agent when to use the tool by describing its content, and it explicitly names fr_course as the alternative for checking what a course costs right now. It does not provide explicit when-not conditions or mention other potentially related siblings, so it falls short of full alternative routing.

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