affiliate_hotmart_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 of behavioral disclosure. It does state that the tool returns a single Programme and lists included fields, but it omits authentication expectations, error behavior, and rate limits, leaving clear transparency 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?

The description is three concise sentences, each adding value: the operation, the usage trigger, and the return/discovery guidance. No redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema, the description covers the core workflow: knowing the id, fetching the full record, and falling back to list_programmes. It also mentions the returned fields, though authentication and error handling are not addressed.

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 schema provides no description for the programmeId parameter, but the description defines it as 'network programme id' and explains how to obtain it via list_programmes. This adds meaningful context beyond the bare schema definition.

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?

States it fetches a single programme on Hotmart by network programme id. It also lists the key fields returned (commission, status, advertiser URL) and distinguishes itself from list_programmes by describing the discovery workflow.

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 when you already know the programme id and need its full record' and directs users to pair with list_programmes when the id must first be discovered. This provides clear when-to-use guidance and a named alternative.

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