affiliate_partnerize_get_programme

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It says 'Fetch' implying a read-only operation and specifies the return is 'a single Programme' with fields like commission, status, and advertiser URL. It doesn't mention auth requirements or error behavior, but for a simple get it's reasonably transparent.

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 with no filler. Front-loaded with the primary action, followed by usage guidance and return value. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

The description covers what the tool does, when to use it, and what it returns. With no output schema, it gives a preview of fields. It lacks mention of error conditions or id validity, but for a one-parameter read tool it is sufficiently complete.

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?

The schema has no parameter descriptions, but the description clarifies that programmeId is a 'network programme id' and suggests using list_programmes to discover it. This adds meaningful context, though it could specify format or source in more detail.

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 ('Fetch') and resource ('single programme on Partnerize') with the mechanism ('by its network programme id'). It distinguishes from siblings by naming the network and explicitly contrasting with list_programmes.

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 states when to use this tool ('when you already know the programme id and need its full record') and names the alternative (list_programmes) for discovering the id first. This is clear and actionable.

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