affiliate_shopmy_get_programme

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 discloses that this is a fetch operation (read-only by implication), returns a single Programme with key fields, and requires a known id. It does not cover error cases or auth prerequisites, but for a simple single-record lookup, the description provides adequate behavioral context.

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 that are front-loaded with the core action, followed by return details and usage guidance. No wasted words; 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required param, no output schema), the description covers what it does, when to use it, what it returns, and how to discover the id. It omits error behavior and authentication requirements, but these are not critical for a straightforward fetch tool.

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 one parameter (programmeId) with 0% coverage, so the description must compensate. It explains that the parameter is the network programme id and references list_programmes for discovery. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it doesn't detail format or validation rules.

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 ShopMy by its network programme id, with specific fields (commission, status, advertiser URL) and a return type of a single Programme. It distinguishes itself from list_programmes and from other networks' get_programme tools by specifying the platform.

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 says to use when you already know the programme id and need its full record, and pairs with list_programmes for discovery when the id is unknown. This provides clear when-to-use and an alternative.

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