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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, and it handles this well. It reveals the side effect of creating an account, the consent requirement, the payout mechanics, and the return value. It also adds the operational rule that referral links must be disclosed as affiliate links, which is meaningful behavioral context beyond the schema.

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 three sentences with no filler: it leads with the core action and benefits, then adds return-value information and the essential consent/legal caveats. Every sentence earns its place and the structure is front-loaded for quick agent parsing.

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 7-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is reasonably complete: it states what the tool returns, what account it creates, and the conditions under which it should be used. Minor gaps like cancellation or confirmation behavior could be added, but they are not essential for selecting and invoking the tool correctly.

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 high at 86%, so the schema already documents most parameter meaning. The description reinforces payout methods (USDC, USDT, Wise) which aligns with the 'payout_method' enum, but it does not add new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides. The baseline 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Register the user for Saymetry's affiliate program.' It goes beyond a bare statement by detailing the program terms (30% commission, 60-day cookie, payout methods) and what is returned (referral link, stats dashboard), which clearly distinguishes it from the unrelated sibling tools.

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 explicitly states a critical usage condition: 'Use only with the user's explicit consent.' It also clarifies that this action creates an account with the user's email and payout details, giving an agent the context needed to decide when invocation is appropriate. It does not name alternative tools, but the sibling tools are unrelated enough that no exclusion is necessary.

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