Get campaigns with core metrics

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It implies a read-only operation via 'List', but it does not disclose pagination behavior, the exact meaning of 'core performance metrics', or any potential side effects. The description is adequate for a simple list operation but lacks depth.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the primary action. It avoids unnecessary words and is easy to parse, making it an exemplary model of conciseness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema, no annotations), the description is mostly adequate but lacks important details such as what 'core performance metrics' refers to, how the status filter works, and the effect of the limit parameter. It is sufficient for a basic understanding but leaves some 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?

The schema covers only 50% of parameters (status has a description, limit does not). The description does not compensate for this gap, as it only mentions status as a field in the output, not as a filter parameter. It also fails to explain the limit parameter or its default behavior, leaving the agent with incomplete information.

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 lists campaigns on the configured customer account, with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('campaigns'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_ad_groups and get_keywords by focusing on campaigns and mentions the inclusion of status, budget, and core performance metrics.

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 provides clear context by specifying the scope ('configured customer account'), which implies it should be used for accessing campaigns on the default account. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as when to use search_gaql for complex queries instead.

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