affiliate_firstpromoter_list_media_partners

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the disclosure burden. It adds that it 'Returns MediaPartner records with normalised status' and implies a read-only list operation, but does not explain pagination, authentication, or any side effects. This is adequate but not rich behavioral context.

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 concise sentences, each earning its place: purpose, usage examples, and return/pairing guidance. Front-loaded and free of fluff.

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?

The description covers purpose, usage, return type, and complementary tool, but omits parameter semantics and any behavioral details like default ordering or result limits. For a 6-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, it falls short of fully equipping an agent.

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%, so the description must compensate. It implies 'brand' via 'brand's programme' but leaves limit, cursor, offset, search, and status entirely unexplained. An agent would struggle to know valid values for status or pagination semantics from the description alone.

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 'List the media partners (publishers) running on the brand's programme at FirstPromoter', using a specific verb and resource. It also provides example user queries, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_programmes. The network scope is explicitly noted.

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 usage triggers are given: 'Use this when the user asks "who is promoting us on FirstPromoter?", "which publishers are active on our programme?", or wants an outbound roster.' It also directs pairing with get_programme_performance for per-publisher performance, clarifying when a complementary tool is appropriate.

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