affiliate_netrefer_get_earnings_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses that the tool returns an EarningsSummary including oldestUnpaidAgeDays and implies read-only behavior via 'summarise', but does not detail auth needs, pagination, or potential side effects. Adds some context beyond schema but could be richer.

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?

Two sentences that are front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by usage example, a key return field, and pairing advice. Every sentence earns its place, 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?

With 8 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is too sparse. It only mentions one return field (oldestUnpaidAgeDays) and does not cover pagination (limit, cursor), age filters (minAgeDays, maxAgeDays), or the full EarningsSummary structure. An agent would likely struggle with parameters beyond the basic from/to/status/programmeId.

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 'date window' to from/to, 'by programme' to programmeId, and 'by transaction status' to status, but leaves limit, cursor, minAgeDays, and maxAgeDays unexplained. Partial compensation for an 8-parameter tool.

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 uses a specific verb 'Summarise earnings on NetRefer' and clearly identifies the resource and scope, including breakdowns by programme and transaction status. This distinguishes it from other networks' earnings summaries and from list_transactions.

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 the user wants a single-figure answer plus context') with a concrete example, and points to list_transactions for drilling into underlying records, thereby naming the alternative tool.

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