affiliate_tolt_generate_tracking_link

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the return type (TrackingLink) and a prerequisite (confirm programmeId via list_programmes), but it does not clarify whether the operation has side effects, requires auth, or how errors are surfaced. This is minimal but non-tautological.

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 the core action, and no filler. The return-type and pairing guidance are compact and earn their 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?

For a simple 3-parameter generation tool, the description provides a clear purpose, usage context, return type, and a helpful pairing hint. However, the missing 'brand' parameter explanation and lack of explicit alternatives or error behavior leave some gaps, especially given no annotations or output schema.

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%, so the description must compensate. It explains programme and destination URL but omits the third required parameter 'brand' entirely. It also doesn't provide formats or constraints for programmeId or destinationUrl beyond the schema's type declarations.

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 opens with a specific action ('Generate a tracking link on Tolt') and names the key inputs (programme and destination URL). It clearly differentiates from the many sibling network-specific generate_tracking_link tools by specifying Tolt, and the use case for sharing affiliate links is explicit.

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 states when to use the tool ('when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined') and provides a preparatory step (pair with list_programmes to confirm programmeId). It doesn't explicitly exclude other networks, but the Tolt-specific naming makes the context clear.

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