affiliate_kwanko_list_transactions

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries full responsibility. It adds the useful detail that records include derived ageDays, but does not mention pagination behavior, authentication requirements, default window, or ordering. These are significant gaps for a read 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 tightly written sentences: definition, usage examples, and pairing advice. No redundancy; every sentence adds value.

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 tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key use cases, return highlights, and relationship to the summary tool. It does not state default behavior when no filters are given, but overall it is sufficiently complete for an agent to select and 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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It maps 'window' to from/to, 'specific programme' to programmeId, and statuses to the status parameter. The mention of ageDays hints at minAgeDays/maxAgeDays semantics. However, limit and cursor are not explained.

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 transactions on Kwanko, including specific statuses (pending, reversed, paid) and filtering by window or programme. This differentiates it from sibling tools like list_clicks and get_earnings_summary.

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 provides example user queries ('what did I earn last month?', 'what's still pending?') and recommends pairing with get_earnings_summary for aggregate totals, giving clear when-to-use guidance versus alternatives.

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