affiliate_sovrn-commerce_list_clicks

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. The word 'list' implies a read-only operation and 'recent' hints at time scoping, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, authentication needs, or rate limits. It is adequate but not rich in behavioral detail.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, then usage context, then return type. Every sentence earns its place and there is no redundancy or filler.

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?

The description gives strong purpose and usage guidance, and mentions 'Returns Click records' as a return hint. However, with 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the agent lacks details on parameter formats, defaults, pagination, and the structure of Click records. The description is good but not fully complete for a tool of this complexity.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the 6 undocumented parameters. It only mentions filtering by 'programme and date' (likely programmeId and from/to), but it does not explain limit, cursor, offset, or their usage. This is a significant gap.

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 it lists recent affiliate clicks on Sovrn Commerce with optional programme/date filters. The verb 'list' plus the specific resource 'recent affiliate clicks on Sovrn Commerce' makes the purpose unambiguous and distinguishes it from sibling list_clicks 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?

The description explicitly frames when to use the tool: 'Use this for traffic-side debugging' with concrete example questions. It also recommends pairing with list_transactions to compare clicks vs conversions, giving helpful context. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough.

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