referral_programs_get_default

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only the 'default' scoping nuance plus a REST path; it says nothing about what the program object contains, whether a default may be absent, or error behavior for a missing default.

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?

Two lines, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no redundant prose. It is arguably under-specified rather than overly verbose, but nothing written is wasted.

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 parameterless read with rich annotations, the minimal description is close to adequate, but it never indicates what the returned referral program looks like or how a missing default is reported. With no output schema, a brief note on the response shape would have closed the remaining gap.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to clarify; the baseline of 4 applies. The empty schema with additionalProperties=false is consistent with the parameterless description.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('Get default referral program') and constrains scope to the default program rather than an arbitrary one. It does not, however, differentiate itself from sibling referral-program endpoints such as tiers, history, or daily stats, so the agent must infer the distinction from names alone.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this versus the other referral_programs_* tools, nor any prerequisite or exclusion noted. The only implicit cue is the word 'default', which hints at scope but not tool selection.

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