Update SMS Campaign

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the editable-state restriction, the side effect that edits to scheduled campaigns change what actually goes out, and that omitted fields are left unchanged. This is strong behavioral disclosure; it stops short of describing permissions or auth needs.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying distinct information, with the editability constraint and destructive-caution front-loaded. No 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 mutation tool with full annotations and no output schema, the description covers the key risks (state restriction, destructive scheduled-campaign edits, PATCH semantics). It is close to complete, arguably missing only return/confirmation behavior.

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 75%, so most parameters are documented in the schema itself. The description adds a useful partial-update semantic ('omitted fields are unchanged') but does not expand on individual fields like tag_ids/list_ids/segment_ids targeting. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Update') and resource ('SMS campaign'), which cleanly distinguishes it from the many sibling catalog entries (update-email-campaign, update-push-campaign, update-in-app-campaign). An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly states the precondition that only draft and scheduled campaigns are editable, and adds a caution to confirm editing scheduled campaigns with the user. There is clear when-to-use context, though no alternative tool is named.

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