affiliate_flexoffers_list_programmes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses the return type (array of Programme records) and dual joined/available scope, but does not mention pagination, auth requirements, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied by 'List' but not explicitly stated.

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 main action and resource. The additional sentences provide useful usage examples and return info without fluff. Slightly long but each 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 six-parameter tool with no annotations or output schema, the description explains what the tool does and when to use it, but omits parameter semantics, pagination behavior, and other invocation details. It is adequate for tool selection but not for parameter-level use.

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 description does not mention any of the six parameters (limit, cursor, offset, search, status, categories). The agent is left without any guidance on how to use these parameters, making invocation difficult.

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 lists affiliate programmes on FlexOffers, specifying the scope (joined or available to join). It distinguishes from sibling list_programmes tools by naming the network and providing example queries.

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?

Provides explicit example user queries and notes natural pairing with get_programme and list_transactions, giving clear when-to-use context. Does not explicitly exclude other networks, but the FlexOffers naming implies that.

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