redeem_code

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

Annotations already cover read-only=false, idempotent=false, and destructive=false. The description adds the 'redeem:write' permission scope, which is useful, but it does not disclose the key side effects of redemption, such as the code being consumed, one-time use, or account balance/credit changes.

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 short sentence that conveys the core purpose and the required permission scope. No redundant words or 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 simple tool this is minimally adequate, but with no output schema and no description of what happens after redemption (confirmation, side effects, error cases), the agent is left to infer important consequences of the action.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden. It clarifies that 'code' refers to a promotional code, but adds no format, length, examples, or validation information beyond the schema's bare string type.

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 specific verb ('Redeems'), a specific resource ('promotional code'), and the target ('on the account'). The tool is clearly distinguishable from all siblings, none of which involve redeeming codes.

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, and no alternatives are referenced. Usage is fairly implied by the name and description, but the description does not mention prerequisites like account eligibility or whether codes must be unexpired.

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