update_campaign

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full responsibility for disclosing behavioral traits. It only says 'Update campaign settings' with no mention of side effects, idempotency, permissions, partial update semantics, or other important behaviors. For a mutation tool, this is a significant disclosure gap.

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 short (3 words) with no fluff, but it is under-specified for a tool with 5 parameters. It lacks the detail needed to be genuinely useful, so while concise, it does not achieve an appropriate structure for the tool's complexity.

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 tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It provides only a basic purpose and does not explain return values, errors, or how this update fits into the broader campaign lifecycle. It is minimally adequate but leaves substantial gaps.

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%, with each parameter (title, subject, reply_to, from_name, campaign_id) having a clear description. The tool description adds no new meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Update campaign settings' clearly identifies the action (update) and the resource (campaign), and the focus on 'settings' distinguishes it from other update tools like update_audience or update_template. However, 'settings' is somewhat vague and doesn't differentiate from sibling campaign tools like set_campaign_content or schedule_campaign.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_campaign, set_campaign_content, or send_campaign. There are no prerequisites, context hints, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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