create_campaign

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

With no annotations, description carries full transparency burden. It discloses key behaviors: default PAUSED status, budget model (ABO, no campaign budget), forced false for budget sharing, and objective restrictions. However, it does not mention error handling, validation outcomes, or whether the tool is idempotent. Still, major behavioral traits are covered.

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: three sentences front-load the most critical information (create, default PAUSED, no budget). Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 5 parameters, 2 required, and an output schema, the description covers the essential constraints and behavior. It omits details about return values (but output schema exists) and error conditions. Still, it is sufficiently complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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%, so description must compensate. It adds meaning for status (default PAUSED with caution), objective (must be OUTCOME_*), and special_ad_categories (conditional). However, account_id is not explained, and name is only implied. Overall, it provides significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Create a campaign' with specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from siblings (e.g., create_ad, create_adset) by focusing on campaign-level creation and detailing campaign-specific constraints like ABO budgeting and status defaults.

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 states when to use the tool (to create a campaign) and provides critical usage constraints: defaults to PAUSED with warning against setting live without explicit yes, ABO budget structure, forced false for budget sharing, required OUTCOME_* objectives, and conditional special_ad_categories. This guides agent on both usage and non-usage scenarios.

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