affiliate_tradedoubler_get_programme

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly indicates a read-only operation ('Fetch') and adds that it returns a single Programme with specific fields, which is useful behavioral context. It does not mention authentication or error cases, but for a simple get tool this is adequate.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the primary action and followed by usage guidance. Every word earns its place with no redundancy or fluff.

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 single-parameter get tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what it does, when to use it, and what it returns (a single Programme with fields). The context signals (one param, no output schema) align well with this level of detail.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0%, the description compensates by clarifying that the parameter is the 'network programme id' and that it should be already known. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema property 'programmeId' (string), helping the agent understand exactly what to provide.

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 'Fetch a single programme on Tradedoubler by its network programme id' which is a specific verb+resource, and distinguishes it from list_programmes by emphasizing 'single' vs 'list'. It also hints at the content of the full record (commission, status, advertiser URL), making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 usage guidance: 'Use this when you already know the programme id and need its full record.' It also names the alternative, 'pair with list_programmes when you need to discover the id first,' which is clear and actionable.

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