kickbacks_earnings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the API key requirement, but does not disclose other behavioral traits like idempotency, rate limits, or error behavior. For a simple read tool, this is adequate but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. Front-loaded with the action and result, followed by a prerequisite. Every sentence 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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It specifies exactly what time periods are included in the earnings breakdown, covering the tool's entire functionality.

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 has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds value by explaining what the return data includes (breakdown by time period), which is useful beyond the empty schema.

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 gets earnings breakdown by time period (today, this week, this month, all-time total), which is a specific verb+resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like kickbacks_ads_history or kickbacks_balance.

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 mentions the required environment variable but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings. Usage context is implied but not explicitly compared.

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