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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, which could confuse an agent for a 'search' tool; the description resolves this by explaining it returns Clickwise /dl/ tracked links created for the affiliate the first time a product is returned. It also discloses auth requirements (X-API-Key or Bearer), delivery caps, and freshness constraints that annotations do not cover.

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?

Three dense sentences, each carrying distinct information (scope, auth/return semantics, parameter conditionals) with no filler. It is packed rather than padded, though the parenthetical load makes it slightly heavy.

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?

With no output schema, the description usefully explains what comes back (tracked links) and the constraints governing results. The main remaining gap is semantics for the text/brand/category filters, which the agent must infer.

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 0% across 7 parameters, so the description must carry the burden. It adds real meaning for gtin, country, and offset (market coverage, required-unless logic, pagination scope) but leaves text, brand, limit, and category completely unexplained, so it only partially compensates.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Search fresh GTIN products in the catalog your affiliate can deliver') and immediately scopes it with freshness, permissions, and delivery caps. An agent can distinguish this from siblings like get_product_feed or get_monetization_feed without opening either schema.

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?

Gives concrete conditional guidance: country is required unless gtin is supplied, and offset paginates the currently deliverable subset. It also states the auth prerequisite. It stops short of naming an alternative sibling tool for cases where this search is the wrong choice.

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