affiliate_avantlink_get_earnings_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type (EarningsSummary including oldestUnpaidAgeDays) and suggests pairing with list_transactions. However, it does not mention pagination, auth, or whether it is read-only, though the name implies read-only.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes a concrete example and return type. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool with 8 parameters and no output schema/annotations, the description is incomplete. It covers the core use case and output but lacks details on all parameters, pagination, and edge cases. The missing information is likely critical for correct 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?

The schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description only hints at 'date window' (from/to), 'status', and 'programme', but does not explain formats, defaults, or the purpose of limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, or minAgeDays. It fails to compensate for the schema's lack of parameter descriptions.

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 summarises earnings on AvantLink over a date window, with breakdowns by programme and transaction status. The verb 'Summarise' and the resource 'earnings' are specific, and the mention of 'single-figure answer plus context' distinguishes it from 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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants a single-figure answer plus context' and gives an example ('total earnings in Q1 with status split'). It also names an alternative, list_transactions, for drilling into underlying records, covering when/alternative usage.

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