affiliate_kwanko-advertiser_list_clicks

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It discloses that the tool 'Returns Click records' and mentions optional filtering, but it omits details such as pagination behavior, default time windows for 'recent', and any authentication requirements. This is acceptable but leaves gaps for a full understanding.

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 two sentences, immediately stating the purpose and usage context. It is concise, front-loaded, and every sentence earns its place without redundancy. The structure flows logically from action to intent to companion tool.

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 tool has 7 parameters, 1 required, no annotations, and no output schema. The description provides purpose and usage but omits critical operational context such as required parameters, pagination, default date ranges, and return record structure. For a tool with this complexity, the description is incomplete and leaves significant gaps for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate but only vaguely mentions 'filtered by programme and date'. It does not explain the required 'brand' parameter, the meaning of 'cursor' and 'offset' for pagination, or the format of 'from' and 'to'. The description provides minimal parameter-level insight, failing to clarify the 7-parameter schema.

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's function: 'List recent affiliate clicks on Kwanko (advertiser)'. It specifies the resource (affiliate clicks), the network (Kwanko), and the perspective (advertiser), distinguishing it from sibling tools like affiliate_kwanko_list_clicks. The optional filtering by programme and date further clarifies scope.

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?

The description provides strong usage context by stating 'Use this for traffic-side debugging' and gives concrete example questions ('are my links being clicked at all?'). It also suggests pairing with list_transactions to compare clicks vs conversions, which names an alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool versus other click-listing tools.

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