affiliate_tolt_get_programme

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns a single Programme with commission, status, and advertiser URL, which is helpful. However, it does not mention potential errors, rate limits, authentication requirements, or explicitly confirm a read-only nature. The simple fetch behavior is transparent enough, but lacks edge-case 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?

Two sentences, no filler, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every sentence earns its place, making it extremely concise and well-structured.

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 tool is a simple 2-parameter read operation, but the missing explanation of 'brand' and the lack of an output schema mean the description must compensate more. It does convey the key return fields, but omits how the brand parameter factors in, leaving the context incomplete for full agent use.

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 description mentions 'programme id' but does not explain the 'brand' parameter at all. With schema description coverage at 0% and two required parameters, the description should clarify both. Only one parameter is implied, leaving the other entirely unexplained, which 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 the action: 'Fetch a single programme on Tolt by its network programme id.' It specifies the exact resource and scope, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by mentioning it returns a single Programme and 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?

Explicit guidance is given: 'Use this when you already know the programme id and need its full record' and 'pair with list_programmes when you need to discover the id first.' This clearly states when to use this tool versus the alternative, fulfilling the dimension perfectly.

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