coupon_copy_save

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions 'copy' and 'patch' but does not explain side effects, permissions, or whether the operation creates a new entity or modifies an existing one. The mention of Playwright suggests UI automation but no details.

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?

Though short, the description is cryptic rather than concise. It reads like a developer note and does not effectively convey the tool's function in a clear, structured manner.

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 (6 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain the copy workflow, what 'patch name/desc/SPU only' entails, or what the output is.

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?

The description adds no meaning beyond the input schema. Schema coverage is low (33%), and the description does not compensate by explaining how parameters like sourceTemplateNo or products are used in the copy/patch process.

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 uses jargon ('UI copy reference coupon', 'patch name/desc/SPU only') without defining terms, making it unclear what the tool accomplishes. It does not clearly state the verb-resource relationship beyond a cryptic sequence.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool over sibling tools like activity_copy_save or others. The description lacks any context for selection.

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