affiliate_shopmy_generate_tracking_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It mentions the return type (TrackingLink) but does not disclose side effects, authentication needs, URL constraints, or error behavior. For a link-generation tool, this lack of behavioral context is a notable gap.

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, front-loaded with the action, then usage, return type, and a practical pairing tip. No redundant wording; 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?

For a tool with only two params and no output schema, the description covers the basics: what it does, when to use it, and the return type. But it lacks details on URL formats, invalid inputs, or authentication requirements, making it merely adequate rather than thorough.

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% and the schema only provides names and types. The description adds context by referring to 'programme' and 'destination URL,' and hints at how to obtain programmeId (via list_programmes). However, it doesn't specify formats, required URL encoding, or other validation rules, leaving the agent to infer.

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?

Clearly states 'Generate a tracking link on ShopMy for a given programme and destination URL' and mentions it returns a TrackingLink. The explicit 'on ShopMy' and the verb 'generate' distinguish it from sibling generate_tracking_link tools for other networks.

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?

Provides usage context: 'when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined.' Also advises pairing with list_programmes to confirm the programmeId. However, it doesn't name alternatives or explicit when-not-to-use cases.

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