affiliate_tradedoubler-advertiser_get_programme_performance

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses the return type (ProgrammePerformanceRow) and aggregate nature, but does not address pagination/defaults despite cursor/offset params, nor auth/error behavior. It is not misleading, but leaves gaps.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, usage cues, and complement relationships. No redundant text; each sentence adds distinct value, and information is front-loaded.

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 has 8 parameters and no output schema, and the description covers result semantics and some use cases, but fails to document parameter semantics and pagination. It partially compensates with examples and metric listing, but remains incomplete for safe autonomous 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not explain any of the 8 parameters. It only hints at date filtering ('by date') and publisher IDs via cross-reference to list_media_partners, leaving brand, programmeId, limit, cursor, offset, and to/from formats undocumented.

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 ('Fetch per-publisher performance') and lists exact metrics (clicks, conversions, gross sale, commission) and grouping (by date). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_transactions and get_earnings_summary through the per-publisher rollup framing.

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 query examples ('how is each publisher performing', 'show me the top-earning partners last month') and names complementary tools (list_media_partners for publisher IDs, list_transactions for drill-down), giving clear when-to-use and alternative context.

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