get_campaign_leads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. 'Get' implies a read-only operation, and the permission note is useful, but the description does not explicitly state non-destructive behavior, return format, pagination behavior, or rate limits. It adds some context beyond the schema but omits important behavioral details.

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 concise sentences, no fluff, front-loaded with the main action. The permission note is relevant and efficiently stated. Every word earns its place.

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 getter with 100% parameter coverage and no output schema, the description is adequate but leaves gaps. It states what it does and a permission requirement, but does not describe what the response looks like, how pagination works, or any exclusions. Given no output schema, the description should have provided a bit more clarity on return behavior.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning to parameters beyond 'specific campaign' mapping to campaign_id, which is already stated in the schema. Baseline 3 applies because 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 clearly states a specific verb and resource: 'Get leads generated by a specific campaign.' It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_campaign_ads (ads, not leads), get_adset_leads (leads at adset level), and get_form_leads (form-specific leads) by scoping to campaign. The permission requirement adds 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?

The description implies usage context ('specific campaign') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_adset_leads or get_form_leads. It provides a prerequisite (permission) but no alternatives or exclusions. Usage guidance is implied, not explicit.

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