affiliate_adservice_generate_tracking_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type ('Returns a TrackingLink') and hints at a precondition (confirm programmeId with list_programmes). However, it does not mention authentication requirements, potential side effects, or error behavior, leaving some ambiguity for a generative action.

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?

Three sentences, all essential: purpose, usage, and a practical precondition/return note. Information is front-loaded and no words are wasted.

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 simple 2-param generation tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the core purpose, use case, return type, and a validation step. It lacks explicit auth guidance, but the sibling verify_auth tools in context signal that need. Overall, it is adequately complete for selection and basic invocation.

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 adding meaning: 'given programme' maps to programmeId, and 'specific product or page on a merchant they have joined' clarifies the destinationUrl's purpose. It stops short of describing format constraints, but it significantly clarifies both parameter roles.

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 uses a specific verb-resource pair: 'Generate a tracking link on Adservice' for a given programme and destination URL. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools by naming the Adservice platform and specifying the input scope.

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?

Provides concrete usage context: 'Use this when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined.' It also advises pairing with list_programmes to confirm the programmeId, but does not explicitly list when not to use it or alternatives.

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