affiliate_amazon-creators_list_programmes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden and discloses the return type ('array of Programme records') and the scoping ('joined... or which are available to join'). However, it lacks details on filtering, pagination, or authentication requirements, leaving gaps about actual behavior.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, using only three sentences with no fluff. Every sentence adds value: what it does, when to use it, and related tools.

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?

It covers purpose, usage triggers, return type, and related tools, which is decent for a list operation. However, the presence of 6 undocumented parameters and absence of any explanation about filtering or pagination leaves the description incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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% with 6 parameters (limit, cursor, offset, search, status, categories), yet the description doesn't mention or explain any of them. It fails to compensate for the low coverage, leaving the agent without any guidance on parameter usage.

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 on Amazon Creators, with scope of joined or available ones. It differentiates from sibling list_programmes tools by specifying 'on Amazon Creators' and mentions pairing with get_programme and list_transactions.

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 provides explicit example queries ('which merchants am I working with?') and states when to use it. It also references complementary tools (get_programme, list_transactions) for drill-down and activity, though it doesn't explicitly exclude other networks because the name already scopes that.

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