mailchimp_reports_get_sub_reports

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It does clarify the limited scope to certain campaign types, which is useful, but it does not mention any limitations, prerequisites, or expected response behavior beyond the core 'get' action. For a read-only tool this is acceptable but minimal.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the action and immediately provides the key differentiator (campaign types). There is no filler or repetition of the tool name.

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 only one simple parameter and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers the tool's purpose and context. It could add a note about the return value being a list of sub-reports, but the core use case is clear. Given the low complexity, it is nearly 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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with a clear description of campaign_id as 'Parent campaign ID'. The description adds no additional semantic meaning regarding the parameter, so it relies on the schema. The baseline of 3 applies due to full schema 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?

The description specifies a clear action ('Get sub-reports') and resource, and distinguishes itself by naming the exact campaign types (multivariate, RSS, A/B test) that this tool applies to. This differentiates it from sibling tools like mailchimp_reports_get and mailchimp_reports_list.

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 clear context by indicating the tool is only for multivariate, RSS, or A/B test campaigns, implying when it should be used. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use mailchimp_reports_get for standard campaigns,' so it falls short of full guidance.

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