affiliate_everflow_list_clicks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns Click records and implies a read-only, recent-data scope, but it does not explain pagination behavior, default date ranges, authentication requirements, or ordering — leaving some behavioral ambiguity.

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 action and purpose, followed by practical use-case examples and a pairing suggestion. Every sentence adds value, and the format is easy to scan.

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 six optional parameters, the description is under-specified. It gives the purpose and return type but omits pagination semantics, time-window defaults, and detailed parameter meaning, leaving an agent to guess at invocation details.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'filtered by programme and date', which maps to programmeId and from/to, but leaves limit, cursor, offset, and parameter format/relationships 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 states a specific verb and resource ('List recent affiliate clicks on Everflow'), mentions optional filters for programme and date, and clearly links to traffic-side debugging with example questions. It also differentiates from list_transactions by suggesting a paired comparison use case.

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 says 'Use this for traffic-side debugging' and provides concrete example scenarios, which clearly indicates when to invoke it. It also suggests pairing with list_transactions for clicks-vs-conversions comparison, though it does not explicitly name alternative tools or when-not-to-use conditions.

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