campaign_negative_keywords_find

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'find... with a selector' and does not mention read-only nature, required permissions, rate limits, pagination behavior, or what happens if the campaign does not exist. This is insufficient for an agent to predict tool behavior.

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, front-loaded sentence with no extraneous information. Every word serves a purpose, making it highly efficient.

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 complexity (nested parameters, no output schema), the description is too brief. It does not explain return format, pagination behavior, or error scenarios. An agent would need additional context to use this tool reliably.

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 input schema covers 67% of parameters with descriptions. The tool description adds marginal value by confirming the selector's role. However, the campaignId parameter lacks schema description and is not clarified in the tool description. Overall, the description does not significantly enhance parameter understanding 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 verb 'find', the resource 'campaign-level negative keywords', the scope 'within a single campaign', and the mechanism 'with a selector'. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like 'adgroup_negative_keywords_find' and 'campaign_negative_keywords_list'.

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 does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'campaign_negative_keywords_list' or 'adgroup_negative_keywords_find'. No when-not or alternative usage scenarios are mentioned, leaving the agent uninformed.

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