enable_tiktok_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the plan requirement, which is useful behavioral context. However, it doesn't mention other traits like whether this is a mutating operation (implied by 'Activate'), error conditions, or rate limits, leaving gaps for a tool that likely modifies campaign state.

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 two concise sentences with zero waste. The first sentence states the purpose and outcome, and the second adds critical context (plan requirement), making it front-loaded and efficiently structured.

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 tool's moderate complexity (enabling a campaign), no annotations, and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers the purpose, outcome, and a key prerequisite, but lacks details on return values, error handling, or side effects, which would be helpful for full contextual understanding.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the single parameter 'campaign_id'. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific details beyond what the schema provides, such as format examples or validation rules, meeting the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 specific action ('Activate') on a specific resource ('a disabled TikTok campaign') with the outcome ('so it starts running'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'pause_tiktok_campaign' by focusing on enabling rather than pausing.

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 provides explicit context for when to use ('Requires Pro plan or higher ($69/mo)'), which helps the agent understand prerequisites. However, it doesn't mention alternatives like 'create_tiktok_campaign' for new campaigns or specify when NOT to use it (e.g., if already enabled).

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