douyin_start_campaign

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

The description discloses several important behavioral traits beyond the annotations: comments are drawn from a shuffled bag without repetition until a round is exhausted, any unverifiable comment stops the activity, and the campaign automatically skips videos already commented on across campaigns. This is rich, actionable transparency that the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false) only hint at.

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, dense paragraph that front-loads the core purpose, then adds necessary behavioral and prerequisite details. Every sentence adds value; there is no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The description covers the purpose, prerequisites, randomization behavior, error-stopping condition, and deduplication. Since there is no output schema, it does not explain the return value, and it does not mention how to monitor progress (e.g., via get_campaign_status), leaving a minor gap for a complex mutation tool.

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 33% (only intervalSeconds and intervalMaxSeconds have descriptions). The description adds value by mentioning the need to confirm keyword, comment count, interval, and providing expiration context for approvalId. However, it does not explain the semantics of excludeVideoUrls or intervalMaxSeconds, leaving gaps that the low schema coverage does not fill.

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 opens with '启动后台批量评论活动' (start background batch comment campaign), clearly stating the action and resource. It explicitly says '这会在抖音产生真实评论' (will generate real comments on Douyin), distinguishing it from other tools like get_campaign_status or resume_campaign.

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 lists prerequisites: '调用前必须确认关键词、评论数量、间隔时间，并提供尚未过期的批准ID' (before calling, must confirm keyword, count, interval, and provide non-expired approval ID). This gives clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives 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.