affiliate_affilae_generate_tracking_link

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

No annotations are present, so the description is the only source of behavioral disclosure. It adds a return type hint ('Returns a TrackingLink') and a prerequisite ('pair with list_programmes'), but it does not mention side effects, authentication needs, or error behavior. This is useful but not comprehensive.

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 three concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. Each sentence contributes: the action, the use case, and the operational prerequisite.

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 two-parameter generation tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, usage context, return type, and a prerequisite. It doesn't show an example or detail the contents of the TrackingLink, but it is largely complete for its 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the bare string parameters. It clarifies that programmeId should be confirmed via list_programmes and identifies destinationUrl as the link target. However, it doesn't explain URL format requirements or any constraints on the parameters.

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 opens with 'Generate a tracking link on Affilae', which clearly states the action, the platform, and the resource. It distinguishes this tool from sibling network-specific tracking link tools by naming Affilae explicitly.

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 states when to use: '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. It doesn't explicitly name alternative tools to avoid, so it falls just short of a 5.

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