Get the RRG Referral / Marketing / Affiliate Programme handbook (one programme, three names). Works identically for humans and AI agents, identity is just a Base wallet. Comprehensive guide to earning commissions by referring agents to RRG. Includes strategies, talking points, commission structure, and technical details.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It does add useful context: the handbook is the same for humans and AI agents, and identity is just a Base wallet. However, it does not mention whether the operation is read-only, requires any authentication beyond a wallet, or how the returned content is structured.
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 concise and front-loaded: it opens with the specific resource name, then adds three tightly scoped sentences covering naming, audience/identity, and contents. Every sentence earns its place without redundant or promotional language.
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 zero-parameter document retrieval tool, the description covers what the guide is, who can use it, and what it contains (strategies, talking points, commission structure, technical details). Since there is no output schema, this content description effectively sets expectations for the return value.
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 tool has zero parameters, so the description cannot add parameter-level detail. The baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description adequately explains what the tool returns without needing parameter semantics.
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 and resource: 'Get the RRG Referral / Marketing / Affiliate Programme handbook'. It clearly states what the tool does and distinguishes it from sibling tools by focusing on the handbook content (strategies, talking points, commission structure, technical details) rather than other marketing actions.
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 useful context ('Works identically for humans and AI agents, identity is just a Base wallet') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like join_marketing_program or create_ref_link. No exclusions or alternative tool references are given.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Most tools have distinct purposes with clear category tags. Minor potential confusion between get_current_brief vs list_briefs and get_brand vs get_brand_mcp_endpoint, but descriptions clarify intent.
All tools follow a consistent verb_noun pattern using lowercase with underscores, e.g., check_agent_standing, list_drops, submit_design. No mixing of conventions.
32 tools is on the high side, but the server covers a wide domain including browsing, purchasing, design submission, concierge, and marketing. Each tool serves a specific function, though some consolidation could be possible.
The tool surface covers the full lifecycle of browsing, purchasing, design creation, commissions, and concierge services. Minor gaps like refund handling are absent, but the core workflows are well-supported.