List SMS Campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuine behavioral constraint not in annotations: suppress ids and timestamps in user-facing output unless asked. That is useful presentation-level guidance beyond structured data.

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 short sentences, capability first, behavioral caveat second. Every clause earns its place with no redundancy or filler.

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 read-only list tool with full schema coverage and safety annotations, the description covers purpose, filters, and an output-display rule; return values need not be explained since no output schema exists and the note about ids/timestamps partly addresses it. Pagination behavior is left entirely to the schema, a minor gap.

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 100%, so all five parameters (after, limit, before, search, status) are already documented, including the enum values. The description only restates that name/status filtering exists and adds no format, default, or pagination semantics beyond the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (SMS campaigns), and the noun itself separates it from sibling list tools like list-email-campaigns and list-push-campaigns. It does not explicitly call out alternatives, but the resource scoping makes the target unambiguous.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus get-sms-campaign (single fetch) or the other list-* campaign tools. The phrase 'optionally by name or status' describes filter capabilities rather than when-to-use or exclusions, so an agent gets no routing help.

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