create_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral burden. It mentions 'deterministic' but does not clarify whether the tool persists data, requires authentication, or has other side effects. It lacks disclosure of mutation, idempotency, or return behavior, which is a significant gap for a creation tool.

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, well-formed sentence with no filler. It front-loads the primary action and key attributes (deterministic, Spanish/English) efficiently, making it easy to parse and remember.

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 of 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is inadequate. It does not explain the effect of optional parameters, expected outputs, or usage context, making it incomplete for reliable tool selection and invocation.

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%, and the description only implicitly explains the two required parameters (URL and objective). The optional parameters (days, locale, audience, channels) are not described at all, leaving agents without guidance on their meaning or selection. This is insufficient for a 6-parameter tool.

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 states a specific verb (Create) on a clear resource (campaign plan, copy set, and calendar) with defined inputs (URL and objective). It also mentions determinism and language options, making the tool's function unambiguous even without sibling tools to differentiate from.

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?

It implies usage when you have a URL and an objective, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention optional parameters or exclusions. With no sibling tools listed, a clearer context would be beneficial.

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