pausar_campania

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden. It discloses that the tool stops spending, but fails to mention reversal, permission requirements, or side effects. For a mutation tool, this is adequate but not thorough.

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, clear sentence with no fluff. It is front-loaded with the verb and subject, and the parenthetical adds value without increasing length unnecessarily.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers the core action. However, it lacks details on immediate effects, response, or prerequisites, leaving minor gaps.

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 100% for the single required parameter 'campaignId', which is well-described in the schema as 'ID de la campaña.' The description adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline score 3 applies.

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 'Pausa' (pauses) and the resource 'una campaña de Meta Ads', with an explanatory parenthetical 'deja de gastar' that clarifies the effect. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like activar_campania (activate) and crear_campania (create).

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 implies usage for stopping campaign spending but provides no explicit when-to-use, when-not-to-use, or alternative tool guidance. The sibling activar_campania offers a contrast, but the description does not mention it.

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