affiliate_lomadee_get_programme

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full transparency burden. It indicates a read-only 'Fetch' operation and informs the agent about the return contents ('commission, status, advertiser URL'), which is useful behavioral context. It doesn't cover error cases or authentication, but for a simple single-record fetch this is reasonable.

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, front-loaded with the primary purpose followed by situational guidance. Every word adds value, with no redundancy or filler.

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 one-parameter fetch with no output schema, the description covers purpose, parameter semantics, return type, and return contents ('full record'), and even suggests a companion workflow with list_programmes. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand and invoke the tool 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%, but the description compensates by explaining that programmeId is the network programme id and that the agent must already know it. It also connects to list_programmes for discovery, clarifying how the id is obtained.

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 fetches a single Lomadee programme by network programme id, specifying the exact resource and scope. It differentiates from the sibling list_programmes tool by emphasizing it returns a single Programme.

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 states when to use the tool ('when you already know the programme id and need its full record') and advises pairing with list_programmes when the id needs to be discovered first. This provides direct, actionable guidance without ambiguity.

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