mailchimp_campaigns_test

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action without revealing that emails are actually delivered to the provided addresses, that the campaign's send status is unaffected, or any rate limits or state prerequisites. This is a significant gap for a tool that sends emails.

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, focused sentence that clearly communicates the core purpose without unnecessary words. It is concise and front-loaded, earning its place entirely.

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 tool with three required parameters and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It doesn't explain what happens on success, side effects (e.g., sending emails), or clarify that test emails are only sent to the provided addresses. The schema's max 5 emails is not reiterated, and there's no differentiation from similar tools beyond the name.

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 input schema already describes all three parameters (send_type, campaign_id, test_emails) with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the action ('Send a test email') and the resource ('for a campaign'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like mailchimp_campaigns_send, which likely sends to all recipients. The word 'test' makes the specific purpose 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?

The word 'test' implies the use case (testing rather than final send), but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this vs alternatives like campaign_send. The description does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or relationship to other campaign actions.

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