copy_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the action (copy/duplicate) and what is copied, but does not mention side effects such as whether the original is modified, required permissions, cost implications, or the return value (e.g., new campaign ID). This is a significant gap for a mutation 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 two short sentences with no filler. It leads with the core action and follows with key details, making it highly efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool has 4 parameters and no output schema, the description should explain the return value and side effects. It covers the main functionality but omits what is returned (e.g., new campaign ID) and whether the original is untouched. It is adequate for basic understanding but incomplete for a copy operation.

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 adds minimal context by mentioning 'optional name override' and 'copies structure including ad sets and ads', which loosely maps to the name and deep_copy parameters. It does not provide additional syntax or formatting details beyond the schema, hence the baseline score.

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 tool copies an existing campaign, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling copy tools by noting it copies structure including ad sets and ads, making its scope unambiguous.

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 implies usage: it is for copying an entire campaign, not just an ad set or ad. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like copy_adset or copy_ad, nor does it provide when-not-to-use guidance. The context is clear but not contrasted with other copy tools.

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