Create Promotion Task

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

Annotations indicate a non-read-only, non-destructive, open-world tool. The description adds that it spends points and a daily slot, and enforces minimum pricing, which provides useful behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with main purpose, and includes key constraints. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured.

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?

Given the complexity of 9 parameters and no output schema, the description covers high-level behavior but does not mention return value. It refers to get_api_reference for details, which partially compensates. Adequate but with gaps.

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 78%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining cost calculation (price × actions_required) and platform-specific minimums, although it does not detail every parameter.

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 clearly states the tool creates a promotion task on Upvote.club, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like delete_task, get_api_reference, and get_task_status.

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 description advises to call get_api_reference for examples and errors, and notes auto-detection of platform from URL. It does not explicitly state when not to use, but the context is clear for task creation.

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