affiliate_awin-advertiser_get_programme_performance

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not mention authentication requirements, side-effect safety, pagination behavior, or data update cadence. The only behavioral hint is that it 'Returns ProgrammePerformanceRow records', which is minimal.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by usage examples, then return type and related tools. Every sentence earns its place, and there is minimal 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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is not fully complete. It covers what and when, but lacks parameter/return structure details. However, it is more helpful than most similar tools, making it adequate but with clear gaps.

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 no descriptions (0% coverage), and the description only hints at date and publisher filtering ('by date', 'per-publisher'). It does not explain required 'brand', 'programmeId', pagination via 'limit'/'cursor'/'offset', or how 'from'/'to' interact.

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 a specific action ('Fetch per-publisher performance') with a defined resource (brand's programme at Awin), and lists concrete metrics (clicks, conversions, gross sale, commission). It also provides example user queries that distinguish this tool from siblings like list_transactions and get_earnings_summary.

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 says 'Use this when...' and gives real-world user phrasings. It also differentiates from alternatives by suggesting pairings with list_media_partners (for publisher ids) and list_transactions (for transaction-level drill-down), making the when-to-use/not-use context clear.

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