affiliate_addrevenue_list_programmes

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral transparency. It discloses the return type and the scope (joined or available programmes), but omits key behavioral traits such as authentication prerequisites, pagination behavior, and filtering semantics, which are important for correct invocation.

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 concise and well-structured: the first sentence states the core purpose, the second gives usage triggers, and the third explains the return type and related tools. Every sentence earns its place without unnecessary filler.

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?

The description adequately covers selection and basic use, including return type and related tools, but lacks details on parameter semantics and behavioral preconditions like authentication. Given the absence of an output schema and annotations, this is a clear gap for advanced usage.

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 schema has 6 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description does not mention any of them (limit, cursor, offset, search, status, categories). The agent receives no guidance on how to filter or paginate results, leaving the parameters to be guessed from names alone.

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 affiliate programmes the publisher has joined or can join on Addrevenue, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling get_programme and list_transactions tools by naming them and the platform.

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 provides explicit query examples for when to use this tool and mentions pairing with get_programme and list_transactions. It doesn't explicitly state when not to use it or compare to other networks' list_programmes, but the Addrevenue-specific context makes the usage clear.

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