affiliate_belboon_list_clicks

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 implies a read-only 'List' operation and mentions the return type ('Returns Click records'), but it does not explicitly disclose authentication needs, default time windows, or pagination behavior. The term 'recent' is vague and could mislead about date filters.

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, front-loaded with the core function, then usage context. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy. It is concise yet informative.

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 no output schema and 6 parameters, the description provides a solid overview but lacks important details. It states the return type and usage, but does not cover pagination parameters, date formats, or authentication requirements. For a list tool with multiple optional filters, these gaps reduce completeness.

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%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning for some parameters by mentioning filtering 'by programme and date', which maps to programmeId and from/to. However, it does not address limit, cursor, or offset, leaving pagination semantics 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List recent affiliate clicks on Belboon'. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like affiliate_belboon_list_transactions by focusing on clicks and even suggests pairing with list_transactions for comparison.

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?

Provides explicit usage context: 'Use this for traffic-side debugging' with concrete example questions. It also names an alternative/complementary tool ('pair with list_transactions'), giving 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.