Start Campaign

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

Annotations provide destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the precondition of a startable state. However, it does not disclose what happens on failure, whether the operation is reversible, or what side effects starting a campaign may have. Some behavioral context is present, but gaps remain.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The main action and the critical precondition are front-loaded and every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple with one parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema. The description covers the essential precondition. It could be more explicit about what 'startable state' means or what happens if violated, but the current level is sufficient for a straightforward state-change tool.

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 the parameter campaign_id is already documented as a 'Prosp campaign UUID'. The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond the schema, which is acceptable given the high coverage.

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?

Clearly states the operation as starting a campaign, which is a specific verb and resource. It is distinguished from siblings like stop_campaign by the opposing action, though the description largely repeats the tool name.

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 notes the key precondition: the campaign must be in a startable state. This gives an agent a clear condition to check, likely via get_campaign_status, before calling the tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the precondition is meaningful guidance.

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