Approve creation strategy

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

Annotations already set destructiveHint: true. The description adds that it 'start[s] building planned channels,' which explains the destructive nature. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous information: first states the action, second notes the permission requirement. Highly efficient.

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?

While concise, the description lacks details on what 'a campaign strategy document' is or what 'planned channels' are. For a destructive action with no output schema, more context about outcomes would improve completeness.

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?

There is one parameter, 'creationId,' with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not explain what the creationId represents or how to obtain it, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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 'Approve a campaign strategy document and start building planned channels,' which specifies a distinct action and resource. This differentiates it from sibling tools like 'read_marketing_strategy' or 'decide_approval'.

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 includes a prerequisite ('Requires `campaigns:write`') and implies when to use (approving a strategy). However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like 'decide_approval' for other approvals.

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