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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden, and it does disclose a key behavior: the campaign goes live immediately with no separate publish step. It also states the return values. However, it doesn't mention permissions, idempotency, or failure modes, which are important for a mutating operation.

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 three concise sentences, each adding value: purpose, return values, and the immediate-launch behavior. No filler or repetition.

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 an 8-parameter tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description explains the essential behavior and return values. The schema covers parameter details, and the 'goes live immediately' note clarifies the lifecycle. It doesn't cover edge cases, but it's sufficiently complete for the core function.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond the schema, nor does it need to since the schema entries are self-explanatory.

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 clearly states the action ('Create and launch a new campaign') and identifies the resource (a campaign for the calling business). It also mentions return values (id, name, dashboard URL), which further distinguishes it from sibling tools that read or review campaigns.

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 provides clear context: it is for creating and immediately launching a campaign, which distinguishes it from list/view/review siblings. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives, but the 'goes live immediately' note implies when this tool is appropriate (creation) versus a draft/publish workflow absent here.

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