update_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions the partial update nature, the state constraint (409 conflict), and which fields can be nulled. It does not cover authentication or rate limits, but provides meaningful behavioral context.

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 sentence that covers purpose, constraints, and null handling. It is front-loaded and efficient, though the null instruction could be separated for clarity. No wasted words.

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 15 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description leaves gaps. It explains null handling and state constraint, but does not cover return values, default behaviors for unmentioned fields, or permissions. Adequate but incomplete for complex 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 low (13%). The description compensates by listing nullable fields and explaining that passing null clears them. It also clarifies the sender parameter's purpose. However, many parameters (e.g., name, fromEmail, approvalRequired) lack explanation. Still adds significant 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 states the tool updates a campaign by id with partial updates. It uses the verb 'Update' and the resource 'campaign', and distinguishes from sibling tools like create_campaign, delete_campaign, send_campaign, etc.

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 explicitly states the campaign must be in 'draft or pending_approval' state, and that a 409 error occurs if it is sending. It also instructs to pass an explicit null to clear nullable fields. While it does not list alternative tools for different states, the condition is clear.

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