direct.hf.find_campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered externally. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that, such as access requirements, result limits, or how the 'human-friendly' behavior differs from raw list tools.

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 definition is a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted clauses. The phrase 'Human-friendly' is somewhat vague filler, but the overall structure is efficient.

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 7-parameter read tool with low schema description coverage and many sibling list/find tools, the description is too thin. It does not explain filtering behavior, account/project context, or how this wrapper differs from direct.list_campaigns.

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 only 29%, so the description should compensate but does not. It mentions name/status/type filters, loosely mapping to name_contains, statuses, and types, but leaves account_id, direct_client_login, limit, and states without added meaning.

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 states a clear verb and resource: find campaigns, filtered by name/status/type. It is understandable without the schema, but it does not distinguish this tool from sibling direct.list_campaigns or the other direct.hf.find_* tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as direct.list_campaigns or direct.hf.find_adgroups. It neither states prerequisites nor excludes inappropriate use cases.

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