Affilync MCP Server

listCommissions

Read-only

Retrieve your affiliate commission records with optional filters by status, page, and page size.

Instructions

List your individual commission records from conversions and sales

Tool call template

This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {},
    "name": "listCommissions"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`page`	No	Page number (default 1)
`page_size`	No	Items per page (default 20, max 50)
`commission_status`	No	Filter by commission status

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.1.0Jul 29, 2026

TDQS

A3.8/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description's 'list' is consistent and adds the source (conversions and sales). However, it does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or any side effects, which is acceptable given annotations cover safety.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of 9 words with no wasted text. It efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without redundancy.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and source. While it omits mention of pagination or filtering capabilities, the schema handles parameter details, making the description reasonably complete.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with each parameter adequately described (page, page_size, commission_status). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, landing at baseline 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool lists individual commission records from conversions and sales, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings like getEarningsSummary which summarizes earnings, and listAffiliateApplications which handles applications.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage for listing personal commission records, but offers no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned; usage context is only vaguely implied.

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