direct.hf.get_campaign_summary

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. The description adds that the output is summarized counts rather than full records, which is useful context, but says nothing about filtering behavior, limits, or how campaign/account scoping affects results.

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 compact sentence that front-loads the action and the returned content. The 'Human-friendly:' prefix is mildly redundant filler, but there is no wasted text beyond that.

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 five parameters (none required), an output schema present, and only 40% parameter coverage, the description does not explain how to scope the summary or what the limit does. It is too thin for a tool whose behavior depends on optional selectors.

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 40%: only account_id and direct_client_login carry descriptions, while limit, campaign_id, and campaign_name are undocumented. The description offers no parameter-level information to compensate, so the agent must guess at the semantics of limit and the campaign selectors.

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 ('summarize') and resource ('campaigns') and clarifies the content of the summary (counts of adgroups/ads/keywords). It is distinguishable from sibling tools like get_campaign_assets or get_bids_summary, though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 adjacent tools such as direct.list_campaigns or direct.hf.find_campaigns. There is no mention of prerequisites, scoping conditions, or exclusions, leaving routing to inference.

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