Disable promotion

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the agent knows this is a mutation but not deletion. The description adds the behavioral consequence that the promotion 'can no longer be used,' which is useful. However, it does not disclose reversibility, permissions, or effects on existing uses.

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 a single sentence of 9 words, front-loaded with the action ('Disable a promotion') and followed by a brief consequence. No filler or redundant content.

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 simple one-parameter tool with annotations and no output schema, the description is adequate: it states the purpose and effect. It doesn't mention how to re-enable a promotion or contrast with update_promotion, but these are not essential for basic usage.

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 description coverage is 100%: promotion_id is described as 'Promotion UUID.' The tool description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 the specific verb 'Disable' with the resource 'promotion' and states the outcome 'so it can no longer be used.' This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_promotion, which handles other changes, and get_promotion/list_promotions, which are read-only.

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 usage is implied: use this when you want to disable a promotion. However, there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from update_promotion, which might also alter promotion status. No alternatives are mentioned.

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