list_campaigns

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states a read operation ('Get') but omits details on pagination (despite limit/start parameters), permission requirements, rate limits, or what happens with empty results. The description is insufficient for safe autonomous use.

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 single sentence is concise but lacks structure. It doesn't front-load critical constraints or provide a clear overview. While not verbose, it sacrifices important details, making it minimally adequate rather than well-crafted.

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 presence of 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain pagination, default behavior, filtering scope, or the response format. For a listing tool with moderate complexity, this leaves significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description does not add any meaning beyond the schema—e.g., it doesn't explain what 'search' targets (campaign names? descriptions?), or how 'publishedOnly' interacts with other filters. No extra value is provided.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'all campaigns', with added detail on included data ('status and statistics'). It differentiates from sibling tools like get_campaign (single campaign) and other list_* tools. However, it doesn't clarify that the result may be filtered via parameters (search, limit, etc.), slightly reducing precision.

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 such as get_campaign for a single record, or search_contacts for campaign members. No context about prerequisites or typical use cases is provided, leaving the agent to infer without support.

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