affiliate_partnerize-advertiser_generate_tracking_link

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It mentions that it returns a TrackingLink and advises confirming programmeId with list_programmes first, but it does not disclose side effects, authentication requirements, or error behavior. The term 'Generate' implies a mutation but no reversibility or quota impact is noted.

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 with no redundant content. It front-loads the purpose, then adds usage context and a return/note. This is compact and well-structured.

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 annotations, no output schema, and zero parameter descriptions, the description is insufficient for an agent to confidently invoke the tool. It fails to explain the brand parameter, does not describe the TrackingLink return shape, and omits error or prerequisite details beyond the programmeId tip.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must explain all parameters. It mentions 'programme' and 'destination URL' but does not explain the 'brand' parameter at all, which is listed as required in the schema. It also does not clarify the expected formats or relationship between programmeId and brand.

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 generates a tracking link on Partnerize (Advertiser) for a given programme and destination URL, and explicitly frames it for sharing affiliate links. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like the publisher-oriented Partnerize tool or other networks' tracking link generators.

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 provides explicit usage context ('Use this when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined') and a concrete prerequisite ('pair with list_programmes to confirm the programmeId before calling'). It does not name alternatives for when this tool should not be used, but the context is clear enough.

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