List promocodes

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already communicates that this is a safe read operation. The description adds 'paginated' and notes the required status, but these are already evident from the schema and the tool name. No additional behavioral context (e.g., rate limits, auth requirements) is provided, but no contradictions exist.

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?

Two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose. No waste or redundant phrasing. The description is efficient and immediately 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?

The schema is rich with detailed parameter descriptions and an annotation for safety, so the short description suffices for this straightforward list operation. The lack of an output schema is not a major gap given the simplicity, though a note about the response format would have been ideal.

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 100%, with each parameter (all, page, status, per_page) well-documented. The description adds no extra semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 lists promocodes with status filtering and pagination. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_promocode (single record) and create/update_promocode by emphasizing the list and filter aspect.

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 provides clear context that the status filter is required by the API, which aids in correct invocation. It does not explicitly mention alternatives like get_promocode for single lookups, but the name and scope make this obvious. No exclusions are stated, so a 4 is appropriate.

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