create_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'create and save' but does not disclose whether the operation is mutable, idempotent, or requires specific permissions. The YAML example in the schema provides some detail but the description itself lacks transparency.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that conveys the essential purpose without any superfluous words. It is appropriately sized for a simple creation tool.

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 complexity of campaign creation, the description is minimal. It does not mention return values, error conditions, or prerequisites, but the schema's YAML example and the existence of an output schema partially compensate. However, more context on behavior would improve completeness.

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% for the single parameter 'campaign_yaml', with a detailed YAML example. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, meeting the baseline expectation.

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 specifies the verb ('Create and save'), the resource ('a campaign'), and the structure ('one audience x one or more ad/email variants'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like 'run_campaign' which likely executes a campaign, and 'compare_campaign_variants' which is for comparison.

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 implies usage for creation but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'run_campaign' or 'update_model'. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned, but the context of creation is clear.

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