coupon_template_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states a read operation but does not mention whether multiple identifiers can be provided, if any are required (schema shows none required), or any side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. The description is minimal.

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 a single sentence of 9 words with no redundancy. It front-loads the verb and resource, making it easy to scan. Every word earns its place.

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 low complexity (single get operation, no output schema), the description is moderately complete. It covers the action and primary parameters but lacks details on parameter interaction (e.g., behavior when multiple identifiers provided), required parameters (none in schema but implied need), and return value structure. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 low (25%: only country has a description). The description adds meaning for three parameters (templateNo, couponNo, id) by explaining they are lookup keys. However, the country parameter's role remains unexplained, and it's unclear if multiple identifiers can be used together. The description partially compensates for the schema gaps.

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 verb 'get' and the resource 'coupon template detail' with explicit lookup keys (templateNo, couponNo, id). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like coupon_template_list (list vs detail) and coupon_copy_save (save vs retrieve).

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 usage when you have one of the three identifiers, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over others, nor does it provide exclusions or alternative recommendations. The context is implied but not explicit.

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