get_programGet full details of an affiliate program including agent instructions, commission terms, restrictions, and signup info
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| slug | Yes | Program slug (e.g. 'anthropic-claude') |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections. Dates show when Glama detected each change.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description adds context about the specific data fields returned (agent instructions, commission terms, restrictions, signup info), going beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It provides transparency about what information the tool surfaces, though it does not mention response format or edge cases.
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, focused sentence that front-loads the action and purpose, with no redundant words. Every phrase earns its place.
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 single-parameter, read-only tool with no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the tool's scope and return content. It is complete given the tool's simplicity, though it could explicitly tie the slug to the program identity.
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 already fully documents the 'slug' parameter with an example and type. The description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies.
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 the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the resource as 'full details of an affiliate program', explicitly listing the included content (agent instructions, commission terms, restrictions, signup info). This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools list_categories and search_programs, which serve different purposes.
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 implies this tool is for retrieving complete information about a single program, contrasting with siblings that list categories or search programs. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this over alternatives, such as when a specific slug is already known.
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.
Each tool has a clearly distinct purpose: retrieving a specific program's details, listing categories, and searching programs. There is no overlap or ambiguity between them.
All tool names follow a consistent verb_noun pattern: get_program, list_categories, search_programs. The naming is predictable and uniform.
Three tools is well-scoped for a focused affiliate program directory. Each tool serves a necessary function without redundancy or bloat.
The core workflows of discovering and retrieving affiliate program details are covered. A minor gap is the lack of a direct 'list all programs' tool, but search_programs can fulfill this need, so it's a workable limitation.