affiliate_tradedoubler_list_clicks

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 that clicks are 'recent,' that filtering is optional, and that it returns Click records. However, it doesn't explain pagination behavior, date format expectations, default limits, or confirm it's a read-only operation beyond the verb 'list.'

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 a compact three-sentence structure: function/scope, usage examples, and return/pairing advice. Every sentence adds value, and the main purpose 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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and 6 parameters, the description is incomplete. It covers purpose and usage but omits critical operational details like pagination parameters, date formats, default behavior, and the structure of Click records. The agent cannot confidently handle edge cases or construct complex queries.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but only hints at 'programme and date' (programmeId, from/to). It does not explain 'limit,' 'cursor,' 'offset,' or the format for 'from'/'to' strings, leaving the agent without needed guidance for pagination and optional parameters.

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 'List recent affiliate clicks on Tradedoubler, optionally filtered by programme and date.' This provides a specific verb, resource, and scope. It also mentions the return type ('Click records') and differentiates from transaction tools by framing it as traffic-side debugging.

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 explicitly gives usage context: 'Use this for traffic-side debugging' with concrete example questions, and suggests pairing with 'list_transactions to compare clicks vs conversions.' It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' statement but the guidance is otherwise strong.

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