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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It communicates that the tool will 'dispatch' a campaign and can stream from a remote URL, but it does not mention permissions, irreversibility, background execution, downstream effects on contacts, or any rate/cost implications.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and resource, and includes the key targeting distinction. Every clause earns its place; there is no redundant or filler text.

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 complex mutation tool with 12 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It omits what happens after dispatch, how the agent should interpret the result, and what setup conditions are required before invocation.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already explains all 12 parameters. The description lightly reinforces the recipientSource distinction by mentioning stored contacts and remote HTTPS CSV/JSONL URLs, but it adds no parameter-level detail beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action and resource—'Create and dispatch an outbound messaging campaign'—and clarifies the two audience modes: stored contacts or a remote HTTPS CSV/JSONL URL. This is enough to distinguish the tool from siblings like send_message and create_template.

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 phrase 'outbound messaging campaign' implies when the tool should be used, and the two audience modes give context. However, the description does not explicitly state when to choose this over send_message or submit_template_to_meta, nor does it name any exclusions or prerequisites.

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