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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the endpoint URL and the set of returned fields, which is useful context, but it does not disclose pagination behavior, default field behavior, or any rate-limit/auth traits beyond what annotations provide.

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 a single front-loaded sentence followed by the endpoint path. Every clause earns its place by naming the resource and the returned fields, with no redundant or filler content.

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 read-only list tool with one optional parameter, full schema coverage, annotations, and no output schema, the description provides enough detail about what is returned. Minor gaps remain around pagination and default fields, but an agent has what it needs to invoke the tool correctly.

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%, and the single optional 'fields' parameter is fully documented in the schema, including format and example. The description does not add meaning beyond the schema for this parameter, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific verb and resource: list sales campaigns (opportunity pipelines). It also enumerates the main returned attributes, making the purpose unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from close siblings like get_campaign_stages or list_opportunities, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Usage is implied by the verb 'List' and the resource name, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus get_campaign_stages, list_opportunities, or other list endpoints. No exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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