get_gmvmax_campaigns_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It partially discloses return content but fails to mention pagination behavior, the ability to override the default filter via the 'filtering' parameter, error handling, or authentication requirements. The brevity leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 sentences, each serving a purpose: first stating the action and endpoint, second detailing return content and a key behavioral note (default filter). No wasted words; optimal conciseness.

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 (5 params, no annotations) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and one key behavior (default filter). However, it omits parameter usage guidance and behavioral details like pagination, making it minimally complete but not thorough.

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 0%, requiring the description to explain parameters. It only adds the default filter value for the 'filtering' parameter and implies the 'advertiser_id' is required. Other parameters (page, page_size, campaign_ids) are left completely unexplained, providing insufficient guidance.

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 retrieves GMV Max campaigns and includes specific details about the return content (status and ROI protection info) and the default filter PRODUCT_GMV_MAX. The tool name and endpoint further disambiguate it from sibling tools like get_campaigns_tool.

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 mentions the default filter, implying this tool is for GMV Max campaigns. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or which alternative (e.g., get_campaigns_tool) to use for other campaign types. The context is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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