affiliate_tradedoubler_list_publisher_sources

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses the return shape ('array of sources with id, name, url, type, and status') and the semantic meaning of the id field. It does not explicitly state read-only or mention pagination, but the verb 'List' implies a safe read operation, and the description adds useful context beyond the name.

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 three well-structured sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every sentence earns its place by adding detail about use cases and return values. No fluff or repetition.

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 zero-parameter tool with no output schema, the description fully explains the return value and practical usage. It covers what the tool does, what it returns, and how to use the results in conjunction with other endpoints, making it complete for an agent.

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 tool has 0 parameters with 100% schema coverage, so the baseline is 4. The description adds no parameter info because none are needed, but it does explain how the returned id is used as a parameter elsewhere, which is valuable context.

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 tool lists 'publisher sources (registered websites/sites) for the Tradedoubler account,' using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates itself from sibling tools like list_programmes by focusing on source/site IDs and their role in tracking links.

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 says 'Use this to discover available source/site IDs' and explains how the IDs are used as the 'a=' parameter and as filters in programme/transaction endpoints. It also recommends pairing with list_programmes to scope results, providing clear when-to-use guidance and a companion tool.

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