startBulkCall

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false; the description adds value beyond these by clarifying that the action is irreversible in the sense that a finished/scheduled/running campaign cannot be started, and that attempting to do so will fail. This behavioral context is not present in the annotations. No contradiction with annotation hints.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by a compact workflow explanation and a clear exclusion. Each sentence earns its place. The trailing '(Tags: Bulk calls)' is minor overhead, but the overall structure is efficient and scannable.

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 single-parameter action with no output schema and no nested objects, the description is thorough: it explains the draft setup lifecycle, the precondition, and the failure case. It could mention what a successful start returns, but given the tool's simplicity this is a minor gap, not a completeness failure.

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% (bulk_call_id: 'Id of the bulk call campaign.'), so the schema already carries the parameter meaning. The description only loosely ties the ID to the draft concept via 'a campaign that was created with save_as_draft: true,' adding no new syntax or format details. Baseline 3 is appropriate given full 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 states a specific verb+resource: 'Start a campaign that was created with save_as_draft: true.' This precisely scopes the action to draft campaigns, distinguishing it from siblings like createBulkCall, cancelBulkCall, and retryBulkCall without ambiguity.

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 draft workflow paragraph makes the intended timing clear — use it after creating, adding contacts, setting number pool and concurrency. It also states an explicit exclusion: 'A campaign that is already running, scheduled, or finished cannot be started.' It doesn't name a specific alternative tool, but the preconditions and exclusions are well defined.

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