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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the supported capabilities (filtering, ordering, cursor pagination) and the underlying Keap endpoint GET /campaigns. This goes beyond the annotation and helps set expectations for paginated read behavior.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every clause adds relevant information. No filler or redundant detail.

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 simple read-only list operation with all optional parameters and no output schema, the description plus schema cover the essential invocation details. It could be slightly more complete by noting what the response contains, but the pagination and filtering context is sufficient for an agent to call it 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 description coverage is 100%, so the parameter meanings are already documented. The description's mention of filtering, ordering, and cursor pagination loosely aligns with filter, order_by, and page_token, but it adds no specific semantic value beyond the schema.

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 identifies the action ('List') and resource ('marketing campaigns (automation sequences)'), adding useful context that campaigns are automation sequences. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling list tools, but the verb+resource makes the purpose unambiguous.

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 states that filtering, ordering, and cursor pagination are supported, implying when the tool is useful for listing campaigns. However, it provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling list tools or when NOT to use it.

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