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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the return-field scope (id, name, objective, CBO budget, status) and the no-metrics constraint, but says nothing about ordering, pagination, or how archived campaigns behave.

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 sentences largely restate each other, and they conflict slightly: the first says ids and names only, the second adds objective, CBO budget and status. The space would be better spent on the missing parameter and sibling guidance.

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 four-parameter list tool with no output schema, the definition covers the returned fields but leaves the archive filter, search behavior and pagination unexplained. Adequate to attempt a call, not complete enough to call it well.

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 only 50% — search and include_archived have no schema descriptions at all — and the description adds no meaning for any parameter. The only gesture toward a parameter is "any connected Meta, TikTok or Snapchat ad account," which hints at platform filtering without explaining it or the archive toggle.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (list campaigns) plus the scope: any connected Meta, TikTok or Snapchat ad account, with ids/names and no metrics. An agent knows what it returns, but the definition never distinguishes it from the sibling get_campaigns, which sounds like the same retrieval.

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?

"no metrics" implies this is the metadata-only listing and that metric retrieval belongs elsewhere, but no alternative tool is named and no condition is given for choosing list_campaigns over get_campaigns, list_ads or list_adsets. Usage is only inferable.

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