get_program_details

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden and extensively documents the return payload (commission rates, attribution window, conversion stats, product catalog, etc.). However, it lacks explicit statements about safety (read-only nature), error handling, or rate limiting that would be necessary for a full behavioral profile.

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?

Four sentences, each with distinct purpose: (1) core action, (2) return value specification, (3) usage timing, (4) parameter source. No redundancy; front-loaded with the essential action; every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter retrieval tool without output schema, the description is remarkably complete. It compensates for missing output schema by detailing the rich data structure returned, establishes relationships with sibling tools, and provides workflow context. Nothing essential is missing given the tool's simplicity.

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?

While the schema has 100% coverage for the single parameter, the description adds valuable semantic context by specifying the provenance of the program_id ('comes from search_programs or list_merchant_programs results'), which helps the agent understand the data flow between tools.

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 ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource ('comprehensive details for a specific affiliate program'). It effectively distinguishes from siblings by contrasting with search_programs (discovery) and list_merchant_programs (listing), establishing this as the deep-dive retrieval tool.

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?

Explicitly states when to use the tool ('after search_programs') and for what purpose ('to evaluate whether a program is worth promoting'). It also identifies the specific sibling tools that provide the required parameter, creating clear workflow guidance.

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