List Sponsored Display campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, covering safety and result bounds. The description adds that pagination uses startIndex/count (not nextToken), which is a useful behavioral detail. 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?

Extremely concise: two sentences with clear front-loading of purpose and pagination method. No wasted words.

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 list tool without output schema, it mentions returned fields (budgets, tactics, states) and pagination method. Could mention iteration pattern or default pagination values, but overall adequate given annotations (openWorldHint).

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% with clear parameter descriptions (profileId, stateFilter with lower-case note, startIndex, count). The description does not add significant meaning beyond the schema; baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'List Sponsored Display campaigns with budgets, tactics and states', specifying the resource (SD campaigns) and included fields. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools (e.g., sp_list_campaigns), which would improve clarity.

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?

Provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like sb_list_campaigns or sp_list_campaigns. The only usage hint is the pagination method, which is more of a behavioral detail than a selection criterion.

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