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

The readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false annotations already establish the safe, read-only nature. "Read only; no spend" adds only a marginal financial clarification and does not describe pagination, filtering behavior, return shape, or whether results are live. The docs URI is a pointer, not behavioral disclosure.

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 and front-loaded, which is appropriate, but the "Fields: soclo://tools/..." sentence is a bare reference that does not earn its place. It is concise to the point of under-specification.

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 listing tool with six top-level parameters, a rich nested filter object, and no output schema, this description is far too thin. It omits pagination behavior, filter semantics, and any explanation of what campaign data is returned.

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%, and the description provides no parameter meaning beyond a documentation URI. The nested parameters object contains many filters (status, dates, minSpend, hasDelivery, etc.) that are completely unexplained in prose.

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?

"List campaigns" gives a clear verb and resource within the Soclo Ads namespace, so the operation is identifiable. It does not differentiate from nearby siblings such as get_ad_campaign_details or list_ad_sets, leaving ambiguity about granularity.

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 "Read only; no spend" but offers no guidance on when to use this versus get_ad_campaign_details, list_ad_sets, or other list tools. It also does not mention when filters like status or date range should be applied.

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