Campaigns Set Campaign Status

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

The description adds meaningful behavioral detail beyond the destructiveHint annotation: it explicitly states REMOVED is permanent, PAUSED only stops spend immediately, and without confirm=true the call returns a validated preview rather than applying the change. This fully discloses the tool's side effects and confirmation guard.

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 brief and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Every sentence adds necessary behavioral information, and the two-paragraph structure keeps the core action and critical nuances separate without 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?

Given the rich input schema, output schema, and annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral nuances an agent needs to invoke the tool safely: permanence, immediate spend effects, and confirmation requirements. No critical invocation context is missing.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the interaction between status and confirm: ENABLED and REMOVED require confirm=true, while without it the agent gets a validated preview. This goes beyond the schema's simple boolean descriptions.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Enables, pauses or removes a campaign.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling status tools like ad_groups_set_ad_group_status and ads_set_ad_status by naming the campaign resource directly.

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 gives clear context for when each status is appropriate: PAUSED applies immediately and only stops spend, ENABLED starts spend, and REMOVED is permanent. It does not explicitly name alternative sibling tools, but the resource specificity plus status semantics provide clear usage guidance.

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