affiliate_awin_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 burden. It discloses that the tool returns an EarningsSummary including oldestUnpaidAgeDays, which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it explain behavior when date parameters are omitted or whether auth is required. Some behavioral context is present 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?

Three sentences, each with a distinct purpose: what, when, and output/companion. Information is front-loaded and no words are wasted. It is well-structured for an agent to parse.

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 annotations, and no output schema, the description needs to provide substantial guidance. It covers the tool's purpose and high-level behavior but omits crucial parameter semantics and output structure details. Given the complexity, the description is not complete enough for reliable 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only loosely maps to 4 of 8 parameters: date window (from/to), programme breakdown (programmeId), and status split (status). No details are given for limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, minAgeDays, or date formats. This leaves the majority of parameters unexplained.

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 uses a specific verb 'summarise' with resource 'earnings on Awin' and scope 'across a date window', with breakdowns by programme and status. It distinguishes from siblings by naming Awin and contrasting with list_transactions. This is a clear, unambiguous purpose.

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 states 'Use this when the user wants a single-figure answer plus context' and gives an example. Also directs users to 'pair with list_transactions to drill into the underlying records', which provides an alternative. This is clear when-to-use guidance.

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