get_campaign_performance

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

The annotation readOnlyHint: true is already present, indicating a safe read operation. The description adds the API endpoint, which confirms the GET method. No additional behavioral traits are disclosed, but there is no contradiction.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) and front-loads the purpose. However, it lacks any structure or additional details that would be helpful for a tool with 7 parameters.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not explain the purpose of the report, how parameters interact (e.g., date range vs. presets), or any edge cases. The agent would need to rely solely on schema descriptions.

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 all parameters are already documented. The tool description does not add any extra meaning or context beyond what the schema provides.

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 retrieves a campaign performance report and includes the HTTP method and endpoint (GET /campaigns/report). However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like get_account_performance or get_adgroup_performance, which reduces clarity.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, when to use date ranges versus date presets, or how to interpret the report. The description provides only a bare minimum.

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