Get promocode

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already signals a safe read operation. The description adds value by listing the fields included in the response, but it does not disclose other behavioral aspects such as error handling or pagination. Since the annotation covers the safety profile, a score of 3 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded sentence with no superfluous content. Every word contributes to conveying the tool's action, scope, and included data.

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 single-item fetch tool with one well-documented parameter and a read-only annotation, the description is complete. It lists the returned fields, compensating for the absence of an output schema, and no additional context is needed.

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 input schema fully documents the single 'id' parameter (UUID) with 100% coverage. The description does not add additional parameter-specific details, so it meets the baseline for schema-covered parameters without enhancing them further.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('single promocode') with a clear scope ('by its ID'), which distinguishes it from list-oriented sibling tools like list_promocodes. It also enumerates the fields returned, providing exact purpose.

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 clearly indicates this tool fetches one promocode by ID, which is the appropriate use case when a specific promocode is needed. It does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., list_promocodes for all promocodes), so it lacks explicit exclusionary guidance.

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