Commerce Promotion Create

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it only restates the name's mutation semantics. It says nothing about validation of the ID, uniqueness/duplicate handling, required auth, or what the nested 'offer' object expects — critical gaps for a 4-required-parameter mutation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words, but it is far too sparse for a tool with nested objects and four required fields. Efficient but under-specified rather than genuinely well-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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. However, with zero annotation coverage, 0% schema description coverage, nested objects, and four required parameters, the description omits nearly everything an agent needs to call this mutation correctly.

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% across 5 parameters (id, label, store_id, offer, conditions), and the description adds no parameter meaning whatsoever. The agent has no idea what 'offer' or 'conditions' should contain, nor whether 'id' must be caller-supplied or auto-generated.

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 (Create) and resource (commerce promotion), so the agent knows the operation unambiguously. However, it offers no differentiation from siblings like commerce_promotion_list or any hint of the promotion model it targets, leaving the agent to infer scope from the name alone.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no reference to alternatives such as commerce_promotion_list. The agent is left to infer that this is the write counterpart to the listing tool.

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