affiliate_skimlinks_get_programme

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return type ('Returns a single Programme') and the key fields ('commission, status, advertiser URL'), effectively conveying the read-only behavior. It does not mention error handling or edge cases, but the simple get operation is adequately described.

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 sentences, each serving a clear purpose: function, usage, and return/discovery pairing. It is front-loaded with the core action and contains no redundant or filler content.

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 single-parameter get tool with no output schema, the description fully covers the return value ('Returns a single Programme') and representative fields, along with the discovery workflow. The tool is simple, and the description provides sufficient context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% with only a bare 'programmeId' string property. The description compensates by clarifying that the id is the 'network programme id' and explains how to obtain it (via list_programmes), giving meaningful context beyond the 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 explicitly states 'Fetch a single programme on Skimlinks by its network programme id' with a clear verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes from sibling list_programmes by specifying it returns a single record and mentions pairing with list_programmes for discovery.

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 provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Use this 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,' which clarifies the workflow.

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