Get ClickBank subscription analytics

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description only needs to add behavioral context beyond safety. It adds the fact that 'view selects the ClickBank report' and that subscription data is fetched, which is mildly useful. It does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, or report size, though page/maxPages schema entries partially cover pagination.

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 short, direct, and front-loaded with the main action. The second sentence adds useful view context without fluff. It loses a point because the report list is abbreviated and does not match the enum exactly (e.g., 'cancel windows' is a summary rather than the actual view names).

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?

This is a complex 12-parameter tool with no output schema, five enum parameters, and multiple report view variants. A two-sentence description is insufficient to make an agent invoke it correctly across views. It omits view-specific requirements such as when status is required, how dates interact with trend/cancel reports, and what role means.

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?

With only 58% schema description coverage, the description must compensate for undocumented parameters like role, view, orderBy, sortDirection, groupBy, productId, and endDate. It provides only a partial gloss of the view parameter ('details, next_payment, cancel windows, by_status, trends') and ignores all other parameter semantics, leaving significant meaning unexplained.

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 names a specific verb ('Fetch'), a resource ('subscription details or trends'), and points to ClickBank report views, so an agent can identify it as a subscription analytics tool. However, it does not explicitly distinguish it from siblings like get_analytics or get_refund_amounts, and 'details or trends' is somewhat broad.

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 says 'view selects the ClickBank report' but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling analytics/reporting tools. There are no conditions, exclusions, or alternative tool names mentioned, so an agent must infer applicability from the resource name alone.

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