Remove Campaign File

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true, so the risk profile is known. The description adds only vague hints ('explicitly approved', 'exact') but says nothing about irreversibility, what happens to the underlying file storage, or error behavior on nonexistent/mismatched files.

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?

A single compact sentence with no filler. Efficient, though its brevity is partly the source of the gaps elsewhere.

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 destructive, open-world tool with four undocumented required parameters and no output schema, the description is far too thin. An agent lacks enough information about confirmation semantics and failure modes to invoke it confidently.

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 0% across 4 required parameters, so the description must compensate and largely doesn't. It gestures at the file kind distinction (contract vs draft/final) but never explains campaign_id, campaign_creator_id, or the required confirmation value 'user_authorized'.

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?

States a specific verb ('Remove') and a precisely scoped resource ('contract or exact draft/final file from its campaign creator'). It is distinguishable from siblings like list_campaign_creator_files and get_campaign_file_download, though it doesn't name those alternatives explicitly.

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?

'Explicitly approved' and 'exact' hint at preconditions but never state when to use this versus listing or downloading files, nor what approval flow must precede it. No alternatives or exclusions are given.

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