get_promotion

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It indicates a read operation ('Get') and discloses the return content in detail. No hidden side effects are apparent, though error handling or prerequisites are not addressed.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and enumerates expected fields without unnecessary words. Every part is informative.

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 without an output schema, the description lists the main return fields, giving a clear expectation. The trailing 'etc.' introduces some ambiguity, but it's acceptable for a comprehensive detail object.

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% with one parameter 'id' described as 'Promotion ID'. The description adds context by saying 'by ID' and listing what details are returned, but it doesn't add new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 action ('Get'), the resource ('promotion details by ID'), and enumerates the covered fields (name, type, schedule, discount rules, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_promotions (listing all) and get_promotion_items (maybe only items).

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 implies when to use: when you have a promotion ID and need full details. It doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, but the sibling tool names provide context. Clear usage intent without explicit exclusions.

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