affiliate_profitshare_get_programme

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It conveys a read-only operation via 'Fetch' and discloses the return shape ('Returns a single Programme') and key fields (commission, status, advertiser URL). However, it does not mention error behavior or auth requirements, which would improve transparency further.

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 concise sentences with no fluff. The main purpose is front-loaded, usage guidance follows, and the alternative pairing completes it. Every sentence adds value.

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 tool is simple (one param, no output schema, no annotations). The description covers what it does, when to use it, what it returns, and how to discover the ID if needed. It could mention not-found/error handling, but it is largely complete for a straightforward fetch-by-id operation.

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 adds meaning by specifying 'network programme id', clarifying which identifier is expected. While it doesn't give format examples, for a single simple string parameter this is sufficient context beyond the raw schema.

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 programme on Profitshare by its network programme id, using a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the network and 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?

Explicitly states when to use: 'when you already know the programme id and need its full record'. It also names the alternative: 'pair with list_programmes when you need to discover the id first'. This provides clear when/alternative guidance.

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