affiliate_clickbank_get_programme

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 that the tool returns a single Programme and lists included fields, but does not mention error behavior, authentication requirements, or data freshness. For a simple read operation, this is minimal but acceptable.

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 two sentences, each earning its place: the first states the purpose, the second provides usage guidance and return type. It is front-loaded and free of filler.

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 low-complexity fetch tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core workflow, return type, and relationship to list_programmes. It lacks error handling details and authentication notes, but those are less critical for a simple get-by-id operation.

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 usefully clarifies that programmeId is the network programme id from ClickBank and frames it as an already-known value, but it does not provide format, example, or edge-case guidance. It adds some meaning beyond the raw schema.

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 fetches a single programme on ClickBank by its network programme id, naming specific fields returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by network and from list_programmes by focusing on a single known id.

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?

The description explicitly says to use this when the programme id is already known and to pair with list_programmes for id discovery. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance with a named alternative.

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