ghl_payment_coupon_get

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true. The description adds value by specifying the HTTP method (GET), OAuth scope, and the ability to retrieve by either ID or code. No contradictions.

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 concise and front-loaded: it begins with the purpose, lists the API details, and includes scopes. No unnecessary information.

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 single retrieval tool without an output schema, the description effectively communicates what the endpoint returns (coupon parameters, usage stats, validity periods). It could briefly mention the response format, but the current level is sufficient.

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% and the description mentions the two key identifiers (id and code). While the description adds a bit of context on how to use them, the schema already documents all parameters adequately, so the description's added value is minimal.

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 retrieves comprehensive information about a specific coupon using ID or code. It lists the kind of data returned (parameters, usage stats, validity periods) and distinguishes itself from sibling tools like create/delete/list by being a retrieval endpoint.

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 tells the agent to use this endpoint to view coupon details, which implies it's for individual coupon lookups. However, it does not explicitly contrast with the list tool or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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