Refer and earn: the signed-in admin partner link and stats from Referalli (admin)

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

readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true already tell the agent this is a safe external read, so the description's burden is lighter. It adds two useful facts beyond the annotations: the data belongs to the currently signed-in admin and it originates from a third-party service (Referalli). It says nothing about auth failure modes, rate limits, or what happens when no referral program is active.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no padding, which is good, but the content is near-verbatim duplication of the title plus an HTTP method and path that add little decision value for an agent. The most useful phrase, 'signed-in admin', is buried mid-sentence rather than front-loaded.

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 zero-parameter, read-only lookup with no output schema, the description covers the essentials: who the data belongs to and where it comes from. However, with no output schema to describe the return shape, the description should say more about what 'link and stats' actually contains.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate and the baseline is 4. The description correctly implies no inputs are required by framing the result as 'the signed-in admin' context, which is derived from the session rather than an argument.

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 does name the resource (the signed-in admin's partner link and stats, sourced from Referalli), so an agent knows roughly what comes back, but the verb is only implied by the parenthetical 'GET /v1/referral' and the text largely restates the title. It gives no basis for distinguishing this from adjacent billing tools such as billing_overview, billing_checkout, or billing_portal.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no precondition stated beyond 'signed-in admin', and no mention of any alternative or exclusion. The agent must infer that this is a read-only referral-program lookup purely from the annotation set.

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