affiliate_tradedoubler_generate_tracking_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the return type ('Returns a TrackingLink') and hints at a prerequisite (confirm programmeId), but it does not mention authentication requirements, failure modes, or any side effects. This is a moderate amount of behavioral context beyond the schema.

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, each earning its place: what it does, when to use it, and the return value plus prerequisite. Information is front-loaded and there is no 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 a simple link-generation tool, the description covers purpose, usage context, return type, and a pairing prerequisite. It does not address error handling or network-specific auth requirements, but the essential context is present and the tool's simplicity limits the need for more.

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% and the description only loosely restates the parameter names ('programme' and 'destination URL'). It adds the semantic tip to 'confirm the programmeId,' which gives some context, but no format, validation, or examples are provided to deepen understanding.

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?

Clearly states the action (generate a tracking link), the resource (Tradedoubler), and the inputs (programme and destination URL). It distinguishes from sibling tracking-link tools by naming the network and from list_programmes by its specific function.

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?

Explicitly says when to use: 'when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined.' It also provides a concrete prerequisite: 'pair with list_programmes to confirm the programmeId before calling.' Lacks an explicit when-not-to-use alternative, but the guidance is strong.

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