Discount grid

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

Annotations already establish read-only/non-destructive behavior. The description adds scope ('across all SF theaters'), the structured coverage, and the behavior of flagging today's applicable discounts, which is genuinely useful behavior beyond the annotation booleans.

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?

One compact sentence packs scope, content dimensions, and the today-flag behavior. The phrase 'day-bound days' is slightly awkward, but there is no dead weight.

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?

With no required parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description supplies the only missing context: the domain coverage and the today flag. Nothing essential is absent for invoking this tool.

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 single parameter response_format is fully documented in the input schema, including allowed enums and default, so the description does not need to repeat it. It adds no extra meaning, matching the baseline for 100% schema coverage.

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 definition opens by identifying the exact resource ('Every structured discount across all SF theaters') and adds the dimensions covered (venue, label, detail, day-bound days) plus the today flag. The missing explicit verb and lack of explicit sibling comparison keep it from a 5, but it is unmistakably a discount-listing tool.

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 when-to-use or alternative tool is mentioned, so the tool cannot be explicitly routed against siblings. However, the scope phrasing makes it clear that discount-related queries are the intended use, so usage is implied.

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