affiliate_optimise-media_list_clicks

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that it lists *recent* clicks, supports optional filtering, and "Returns Click records". This conveys read-only intent and basic behavior. However, it omits details like pagination behavior (though limit/cursor/offset exist in the schema) and whether 'recent' implies a default time window.

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 sentences, each earning its place: the first states the action and optional filters, the second gives concrete use-case examples, and the third mentions the return type and a complementary tool. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple list tool with no output schema, the description provides useful context: what it returns, what it's for, and how to combine it with another tool. It lacks details on pagination and date formats, but these are relatively minor gaps given the tool's simplicity and the absence of required parameters.

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 mentions filtering "by programme and date", which explains programmeId and likely from/to, but does not explain limit, cursor, or offset. The pagination parameters are left undocumented, and date format remains unspecified. The description covers only a minority of the six parameters.

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 Optimise Media" — a specific verb, resource, and network. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on clicks and even references pairing with list_transactions, making its purpose unambiguous.

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 "Use this for traffic-side debugging" and provides concrete example questions (“are my links being clicked at all?”, “where is traffic going?”). It also recommends pairing with list_transactions to compare clicks vs conversions, offering clear guidance on when and how to use it relative to alternatives.

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