reports_campaigns

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It implies a read-only operation by stating 'Returns rows', but fails to mention pagination, authentication requirements, rate limits, or any side effects. This gap is significant for a report tool with 10 parameters.

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?

Two focused sentences: the first defines purpose and output, the second adds a key usage hint. No wasted words, front-loaded with essential information. Perfectly concise.

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 complexity (10 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is minimally complete. It covers purpose and groupBy but omits guidance on date parameters, granularity, timeZone, and the selector object (filtering, sorting, pagination). The schema helps, but behavioral context is lacking.

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 description adds value beyond the input schema by explicitly mentioning the groupBy parameter and its effect ('pivot by country, device, age, gender'). The schema already covers groupBy with enum and description, but the description reinforces and provides concrete usage context. Schema coverage is 70%, so the description compensates partially.

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 it is a 'Campaign-level performance report' and lists the specific metrics returned (impressions, taps, installs, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling report tools like `reports_adgroups`. The verb 'Returns' is implied, making the purpose specific and actionable.

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 indicates it is for campaign-level data but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like reports_adgroups or reports_ads_in_campaign. There are no exclusions or alternative suggestions, leaving the agent to infer context.

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