get_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior. It implies a read-only operation but doesn't disclose response format, default fields, or potential errors. The statement is straightforward but minimal, providing basic transparency.

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 sentence that is concise and front-loaded. It states the verb, resource, and differentiator without unnecessary words, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

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?

For a simple get-by-ID tool with only two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the core need. It lacks extra context like error handling or field selection details, but the low complexity means this is mostly sufficient. A slightly richer description would push it to 5.

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 descriptions for both parameters (campaign_id and fields), so there is 100% coverage. The tool description adds no additional detail about parameter meaning or usage, so the baseline of 3 applies given the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 uses a specific verb 'Get' with a clear resource 'campaign' and a unique identifier 'by ID'. It immediately distinguishes this from list_campaigns and other get_campaign_* tools (e.g., get_campaign_ads) by focusing on a single campaign's details.

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 makes clear this is for fetching a single campaign by ID, which implies when to use it versus list_campaigns. However, it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, so it's clear but lacks formal exclusions.

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