acedatacloud_list_distribution_levels

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It states the tool lists 'public' affiliate levels, implying no authentication or sensitive data, but does not disclose return format, pagination, or any side effects. For a read-only list operation, this is adequate but not rich.

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, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. No wasted words; it efficiently conveys the tool's purpose.

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?

Given the tool has no parameters and an output schema exists, the description is sufficient for a simple list operation. It could mention whether results are paginated or sorted, but for a straightforward listing, it is complete enough. The output schema likely covers return structure.

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, and schema description coverage is 100% (vacuously). The description adds meaning by specifying what is listed (levels, thresholds, reward percentages), which is useful context beyond the empty schema. Baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description meets it.

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 clearly states the tool lists public affiliate levels, thresholds, and reward percentages. It uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('affiliate levels'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like acedatacloud_get_distribution_rank or acedatacloud_list_distributions, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from those.

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 usage for retrieving affiliate level information but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like acedatacloud_get_distribution_rank or acedatacloud_list_distributions. No exclusions or alternative tool mentions are given.

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