get_campaign_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It does mention the report contains opens, clicks, bounces, etc., giving some return content context. However, it does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it describe pagination, rate limits, or the exact report structure beyond the examples.

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, front-loaded sentence that uses the active verb 'Get' and includes useful metric examples in parentheses. There is no unnecessary repetition or wasted words.

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?

With one parameter and no output schema, the description provides the essentials but omits return format specifics (e.g., whether metrics are aggregated, time range) and error conditions. The metric examples are helpful, but 'etc.' leaves the report content open-ended.

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?

The only parameter campaign_id is fully described in the schema (100% coverage). The description reinforces that the report is for a specific campaign but adds no new semantic details beyond the schema.

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 detailed performance report for a specific campaign, naming example metrics (opens, clicks, bounces). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_campaign (campaign settings) and list_reports (list of all reports).

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 phrase 'for a specific campaign' implies usage when you have a campaign ID and need individual metrics, but there is no explicit comparison to alternatives like list_reports or exclusions for other use cases. Guidance is implied rather than stated.

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