affiliate_travelpayouts_generate_tracking_link

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only mentions 'Returns a TrackingLink' and does not explain side effects, permissions, rate limits, or failure modes. The validation hint about list_programmes implies potential failure with bad programmeId but does not explicitly state consequences.

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, all information-dense. The purpose, usage condition, and workflow hint are front-loaded with no filler.

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 is simple with only two parameters and no output schema, but the description still omits details like the structure of the returned TrackingLink and error handling. The pairing hint with list_programmes provides some contextual completeness, but behavioral and output details are thin.

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 schema has zero description coverage, so the description should clarify parameter meaning. It maps 'programme' to programmeId and 'destination URL' to destinationUrl, and the instruction to 'pair with list_programmes to confirm the programmeId' adds semantic value for that parameter. However, destinationUrl lacks format or constraints, leaving a gap.

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 verb and resource: 'Generate a tracking link on Travelpayouts for a given programme and destination URL.' This clearly identifies the platform and inputs, distinguishing it from sibling generate_tracking_link tools for other networks. The use-case sentence reinforces the purpose.

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 second sentence explicitly states when to use it: 'when the user wants to share an affiliate link to a specific product or page on a merchant they have joined.' It also advises pairing with list_programmes to validate programmeId, which is a helpful workflow guideline. However, it does not specify when not to use it or name alternative tools.

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