enable_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It clearly states the action and effect (changing campaign status from PAUSED to ENABLED). However, it does not disclose potential error states (e.g., if campaign is already enabled) or permissions/rate limits.

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, clear sentence with no unnecessary words. It is perfectly front-loaded and efficient.

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?

The tool has a simple input schema (2 params, 1 required) and an output schema is present. The description is minimal but sufficient for an agent to understand the core action. However, it lacks parameter descriptions and usage context beyond the basic purpose.

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 coverage is 0% with no descriptions for the two parameters. The description does not add any meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema provides (types and required/optional). It should have compensated for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 the verb 'Enable', the resource 'campaign', and the specific effect 'sets status=ENABLED'. This clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'pause_campaign', which performs the opposite action.

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 the tool should be used on paused campaigns by saying 'Enable a paused campaign', but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives beyond the sibling tool names.

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