affiliate_levanta_get_earnings_summary

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool returns an EarningsSummary including oldestUnpaidAgeDays and suggests pairing with list_transactions, which implies a summary-level result. However, it does not mention auth requirements, pagination behavior, or any limitations, leaving some 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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, then usage guidance, and finally return type and complementary tool. No fluff, every sentence adds valuable context.

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?

Given no output schema and 8 optional parameters, the description covers enough to understand when and why to invoke the tool, plus what to expect in the response. It lacks detailed parameter semantics and behavioral caveats, but is sufficient for a summary tool.

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 conceptually maps 'date window' to from/to, 'programme' to programmeId, and 'status' to status, but it does not explain limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, or minAgeDays. The core parameters are addressed, but not all, and without parameter names or formats.

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 identifies the tool as summarizing earnings on Levanta within a date window, with breakdowns by programme and transaction status. The verb 'summarise' and the explicit scope distinguish it from the sibling list_transactions tool.

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 explicitly says to use this when the user wants 'a single-figure answer plus context' and gives an example query. It also directs the agent to pair with list_transactions for deeper detail, providing clear contextual guidance.

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