affiliate_hotmart_list_clicks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It notes data recency ('recent'), optional filters, and that it returns Click records. However, it does not explain pagination behavior, date range semantics, or authentication requirements, which are important for a no-annotation tool.

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 short sentences front-load the purpose, then provide use case and return type. Every sentence adds value; no redundancy or 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 primary purpose and use cases but omits important operational details: pagination, date formats, and the shape of Click records (no output schema). For a 6-param tool with no annotations, this is adequate but not complete.

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 has 6 parameters with zero descriptions. The description only clarifies that filtering by 'programme' and 'date' is possible, mapping to programmeId and to/from. It does not explain limit/cursor/offset, despite these being standard pagination names. The description only partially compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 it lists recent affiliate clicks on Hotmart, optionally filtered by programme and date. It names the specific resource (affiliate clicks) and platform, distinguishing it from transactions and other Hotmart tools.

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 explicitly provides use cases for traffic-side debugging with example questions, and recommends pairing with list_transactions to compare clicks vs conversions. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' statement, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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