Get all promotions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely useful non-annotation context: an explicit rate limit (100 requests / 10 seconds per shop) plus the pagination capping behavior, both of which affect how an agent should pace and size its calls.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the rate limit, which is the highest-value operational fact. Slightly penalized because the page-size sentence duplicates the schema's own 'size' description rather than earning new space.

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 listing tool with a fully described schema and no output schema, the definition supplies the operationally important extras (rate limit, capped page size) an agent needs to call it correctly. Filtering semantics for codes/account are delegated entirely to the schema, which is acceptable given full coverage.

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 100%, so all four parameters including page, size, codes, and account are already documented in the schema. The description's page-size statement is a verbatim repeat of the 'size' parameter description, adding no new semantics. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clear verb+resource ('Returns all promotions'), so an agent knows this is a listing endpoint. However, it does no sibling differentiation despite living among get_promotion, create_promotion, and update_promotion, so the distinction between listing and fetching a single promotion is left to inference.

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 guidance, no prerequisites, and no alternatives named. The agent must guess that this is the browse/scan endpoint versus get_promotion for a known ID, and nothing explains whether filtering is preferred over paging through everything.

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