affiliate_afilio_get_programme

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only fetch operation and previews the return content (commission, status, advertiser URL), but does not mention authentication requirements or error behavior for invalid IDs, keeping it from a perfect score.

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 concise, front-loaded sentences with no filler. The first sentence states the action and resource, while the second adds usage context and alternative guidance.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (one parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose, usage, alternative, and expected return contents, making it fully complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 input schema has only a bare string property with no description, but the description compensates by explaining that programmeId is the network programme id and directs the agent to list_programmes to discover it, adding significant semantic meaning.

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 states 'Fetch a single programme on Afilio by its network programme id' with a specific verb and resource, and clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_programmes and other networks' get_programme by naming the Afilio network and single-record 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?

It explicitly instructs 'Use this when you already know the programme id' and pairs with list_programmes for id discovery, providing clear when-to-use guidance and a named alternative.

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