affiliate_travelpayouts_get_earnings_summary

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden. It adds useful behavioral context by revealing the return type (EarningsSummary) and a specific field (oldestUnpaidAgeDays), but it does not explicitly declare read-only behavior, authentication needs, or how filters like age/date boundaries affect the query.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and no redundant wording. Every sentence earns its place: purpose, usage, and a useful return insight.

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?

Despite a well-articulated purpose, the description omits explanations for half the parameters, offers only a partial return structure, and lacks essential context like pagination behavior and required fields. With no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema description coverage, this is a significant gap for an 8-parameter tool.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It maps the date window (from/to), programme breakdown (programmeId), and status (status), but leaves limit, cursor, maxAgeDays, and minAgeDays completely unexplained. The agent is left guessing about a large portion of the input schema.

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 summarizes Travelpayouts earnings over a date window with breakdowns by programme and status, distinguishing it from list_transactions by the 'single-figure answer plus context' framing. The verb 'Summarise' plus the specific resource and scope make the 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?

It explicitly says 'Use this when the user wants a single-figure answer plus context' and suggests pairing with list_transactions for drill-down. This is direct, actionable guidance on when to select this tool over alternatives.

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