Get Campaign Status

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the read-only nature, and the description adds no extra behavioral context such as possible status values, error behavior, or handling of invalid campaign IDs. It merely restates the action from the title.

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 short sentence with no redundant words. It loses a point because it is essentially a restatement of the tool title and lacks any additional structural or contextual elements.

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?

With a single parameter, full schema coverage, an output schema, and a readOnlyHint annotation, the context is mostly complete. However, the description leaves ambiguity about what status values look like and how it differs from get_all_campaigns, so it is merely adequate rather than complete.

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 provides 100% coverage for the single campaign_id parameter, including its type and 'Prosp campaign UUID' description. The description's word 'campaign' adds no meaning beyond what the schema already specifies, so the 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?

The description states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'current status of a campaign,' making the basic purpose clear. It does not differentiate from the sibling get_all_campaigns, which may also expose status, so it falls short of a 5.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like get_all_campaigns or get_lead_stage, nor any prerequisites such as a valid campaign ID. The only implied context is that it targets a campaign, which is not sufficient for tool selection.

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