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

The description discloses the 'newest first' ordering logic, which is a specific behavioral trait not covered by annotations or the schema. This is a significant piece of contextual information for agents.

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 extremely concise. It provides maximum information (action, sort order, filtering criteria) in a single, dense sentence with zero waste.

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?

It comprehensively covers the methods of optional filtering and the default sorting behavior for this listing operation. Given the pagination is handled by the schema, the description provides all necessary behavioral context.

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%, making the description vital. It explicitly names the filterable parameters (`sms_account_id`, `sms_account_uuid`, status) and explains that the account identifier can be used in either ID or UUID format, effectively explaining the parameters.

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 (list) and the specific resource (SMS campaigns). It is highly focused and instantly recognizable against other sibling tools that list emails or ads.

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?

While it defines the parameters for filtering (account/status), it lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus a tool like `get_sms_campaign` (which retrieves a single item). The distinction is implied rather than explicitly stated.

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