affiliate_coupang-partners_get_programme

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

Without annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool performs a fetch (read operation) and explicitly says it returns a single Programme, adding return-value context. However, it does not mention potential error conditions or data freshness, so a 4 is appropriate.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence contributes meaning. There is no redundancy or wasted text.

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 single-parameter fetch tool without an output schema, the description covers return value, usage context, and relationship to list_programmes. It provides enough information for an agent to select and invoke the tool correctly without further clarification.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by identifying the parameter as 'network programme id', which adds meaning beyond the bare schema type. It also clarifies that the id is the key for retrieving a full record. For a single parameter, this is sufficient but not exhaustive.

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 Coupang Partners by its network programme id, which is a specific verb+resource. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like list_programmes by specifying the need for a known id and listing the record fields.

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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this when you already know the programme id and need its full record.' It also names an alternative (list_programmes) for id discovery, providing clear context for when to use this tool versus alternatives.

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