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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: it does not say whether all campaigns or only active ones are returned, whether pagination applies, or what a campaign record contains.

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 short sentence with no waste, and the resource is front-loaded. It is efficient but so short that there is nothing to structure; the terseness is a thinness problem rather than a verbosity one.

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?

With no output schema and two required, undocumented parameters, the description should say what is returned and how projectId and siteId combine. Instead it gives one clause, leaving an agent unable to predict the response shape or confidently supply both identifiers.

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 0% for both required parameters, so the description carries the full burden. 'Of a website' hints that siteId scopes the lookup, but neither parameter's meaning is explained, and the required projectId is never mentioned at all — the distinction between projectId and siteId is left entirely opaque.

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 ('List') and resource ('social distribution campaigns') scoped to a website. The singular sibling get_distribution_campaign and the adjacent list_distribution_pages / list_distribution_posts are implicitly distinguished by the resource noun, though the description never says so explicitly.

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 guidance on when to use this versus get_distribution_campaign (single campaign) or list_distribution_pages / list_distribution_posts. No prerequisites or exclusions are stated, so the agent must infer selection from the name alone.

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