affiliate_accesstrade_get_programme

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns a single Programme, lists the notable fields (commission, status, advertiser URL), and implies read-only via 'Fetch'. It does not mention authentication requirements or error behavior, which are minor gaps for a simple getter.

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 filler. The action is front-loaded, followed by usage condition, return value, and alternative. 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?

For a single-parameter getter with no output schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, and return content. Missing auth prerequisites and error states, but it is otherwise complete for the tool's simplicity.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by identifying the parameter as the 'network programme id' and indicating it can be obtained from list_programmes. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema's bare 'programmeId: string', though format constraints are omitted.

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 'Fetch a single programme on AccessTrade by its network programme id', using a specific verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes this from sibling network-specific get_programme tools and from list_programmes, making the purpose unambiguous.

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?

It explicitly says 'Use this when you already know the programme id' and 'pair with list_programmes when you need to discover the id first', directly naming the alternative and the condition for use.

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