affiliate_sovrn-commerce_get_earnings_summary

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 output includes an EarningsSummary with oldestUnpaidAgeDays, adding useful behavioral context. However, it does not mention side effects or auth needs, though summarise implies read-only.

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 purpose; every sentence adds value. The example and pairing note are useful without 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 an 8-param tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is incomplete. It explains the core purpose and return field but omits pagination, parameter formats, and full output structure, making it insufficient for confident invocation.

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 8 params with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It references date window (to/from), programme (programmeId), and status, but does not explain limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, minAgeDays, or the string/array nature of status. This leaves significant ambiguity.

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 summarises earnings on Sovrn Commerce over a date window with breakdowns by programme and transaction status. It uses a specific verb ('summarise') and resource, and distinguishes from sibling tools by naming the vendor and describing the breakdown dimensions.

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 to use this when the user wants a single-figure answer plus context, with a concrete example. It also advises pairing with list_transactions for drill-down, which clarifies when to use the alternative.

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