affterms — affiliate program terms

Submit a program to the directory

submit_program

Idempotent

Submit an affiliate, referral or partner program's page to be checked and added to the directory, free. Use only when the person asks for it or agrees, typically after get_program says a program is absent. Send the URL of the vendor's own program page; a person reads the terms off that page, and anything sent as figures is only checked against it, never published. Sending the same URL again returns what happened to it. An email address, only if the person gives one, is used to tell them the outcome.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "url": "<url>"
    },
    "name": "submit_program"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`url`	Yes	The vendor's own affiliate program page, e.g. https://example.com/affiliates.
`name`	No	The product name.
`email`	No	The person's email, only if they want to hear the outcome. Ask first.
`notes`	No	Anything already known about the terms. Checked against the page, never published.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 19, 2026

TDQS

A4.8/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true), and the description adds substantial context beyond them: a human reads the page, figures are only verified and never published, and an email is used solely to report the outcome. This resolves real ambiguity about privacy and published data.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four dense sentences with the usage constraint front-loaded and no filler; each sentence adds an operational fact. It is slightly long but nothing is wasted.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a submission tool with no output schema, the description covers the human-review process, idempotent re-submission result, and optional notification path, which is everything an agent needs to call it correctly. Annotations handle the safety profile.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description goes further by explaining that the URL must be the vendor's own program page, that email is optional and requires asking first, and that notes are never published. These add meaning beyond the schema even though they overlap it.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (submit) and resource (an affiliate/referral/partner program page) plus the destination (the directory), and distinguishes itself by naming the sibling get_program as the trigger condition. An agent can tell it apart from submit_ad or search_programs immediately.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use it ('only when the person asks for it or agrees, typically after get_program says a program is absent'), which is unusually strong when/when-not routing. It also clarifies re-submission behavior, covering the repeat-call case.

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

All affterms — affiliate program terms tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?