affiliate_digistore24_get_programme

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It conveys a read-only nature via 'Fetch' and discloses return contents (commission, status, advertiser URL). However, it does not mention error behavior (e.g., not found), authentication prerequisites, or confirm lack of side effects, leaving some gaps.

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?

Two concise, front-loaded sentences with zero fluff. The action and resource are stated first, followed by usage guidance and return description. Every sentence earns its place.

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 simple 1-parameter get with no output schema, the description covers the purpose, when to use, alternative, and return shape (single Programme with key fields). Missing edge-case behavior details, but these are not critical for this straightforward tool.

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% and the only parameter is bare 'programmeId'. The description adds semantic meaning by calling it a 'network programme id' and clarifying it is the identifier needed to fetch a full record. Format specifics are absent, but the core meaning is established.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'Fetch a single programme on Digistore24 by its network programme id.' This clearly distinguishes it from list_programmes and other sibling tools, and the 'single' vs. list contrast is explicit.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance ('when you already know the programme id and need its full record') and directly names the alternative (list_programmes) for id discovery. This is exactly what an agent needs to choose correctly among siblings.

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