growth_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It fails to mention side effects (e.g., creating a persistent card), required permissions, or any limits. The agent has no indication of what happens when invoked.

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 very short with minimal waste, using emoji and bilingual summary. However, the structure mixes purpose and parameter lists without clear separation.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool's description omits integration context (e.g., how this card relates to other tools), prerequisites, or what constitutes a 'flywheel bottleneck'. For a creation tool, this is incomplete.

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 inline parameter descriptions add bilingual text and a brief role (e.g., 'target contributors in 72 hours'), but no constraints, examples, or format details. Since schema coverage is 0%, the description partially compensates but remains insufficient for precise understanding.

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 generates a 'public launch card' from a 'flywheel bottleneck', providing a specific action and resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'public_launch_preflight', which may have overlapping functionality.

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 lacks any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as when a campaign is appropriate or prerequisites. No exclusions or context provided.

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