affiliate_skimlinks_get_earnings_summary

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the return type (EarningsSummary) and the presence of oldestUnpaidAgeDays, which gives useful behavioral context. However, it does not disclose any limitations, auth requirements, or whether the date range is mandatory, leaving some opacity for a non-annotated read tool.

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 concise sentences with the core purpose first, followed by usage context and return information. No filler or redundancy.

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 summary tool with no output schema, the description provides good high-level context, including the return content and a companion tool. But the lack of parameter explanations and no mention of defaults or required fields makes it incomplete for correct invocation with 8 parameters.

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 zero descriptions for its 8 properties, and the description only implicitly covers from/to (date window), status (transaction status), and programmeId (programme). Parameters like limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, and minAgeDays remain unexplained, so the description does not compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 summarizes Skimlinks earnings over a date range with breakdowns by programme and status, using the specific verb 'Summarise' and identifying the resource and scope. It also distinguishes this network-specific tool from the many sibling get_earnings_summary tools by naming Skimlinks.

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 explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants a single-figure answer plus context' and provides an example. It also instructs to 'pair with list_transactions to drill into the underlying records,' showing when a complementary tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly state when not to use the tool, but the guidance is clear.

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