mailchimp_reports_get

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It only states a 'get' operation, implying a read-only action, but does not describe what the returned report contains, any authentication requirements, or whether it returns paginated data or a single object.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It immediately conveys the core action and object, making it appropriately concise for such a simple tool.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is minimally adequate but incomplete. It does not explain what a 'detailed campaign report' includes or how this tool differs from other report retrieval tools, leaving the agent to infer the return structure and scope.

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 already describes the only parameter ('Campaign ID') with 100% coverage. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameter, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without further elaboration.

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 identifies the action ('Get') and the resource ('detailed campaign report'), making it easy to understand the basic purpose. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like mailchimp_reports_get_click_details or mailchimp_reports_list, so it lacks full sibling distinction.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this retrieves a single campaign's report, as opposed to listing reports or retrieving specific sub-reports. No exclusions or prerequisites are provided.

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