get_campaign_detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool retrieves campaign details, implying a read operation, but does not explicitly confirm read-only, discuss error handling, rate limits, or authentication requirements. The behavioral coverage is minimal.

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 concise with two main sentences plus an Args section. The bilingual title line is slightly redundant but not harmful. Front-loading is effective: the first sentence captures the core function. No unnecessary 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters, no output schema), the description adequately covers the return value (budget, targeting, status, creative settings). It does not mention pagination or error scenarios, but for a detail endpoint, this is sufficient. Completeness is high relative to complexity.

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%, so the description must add semantic value. It provides clear Arg descriptions: 'advertiser_id: The advertiser account ID. campaign_id: The campaign ID to query.' This explains the purpose of each parameter beyond the schema, compensating well for the lack of schema documentation.

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 detailed information about a specific advertising campaign, listing key attributes (budget, targeting, status, creative settings). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_campaigns (which lists campaigns) and get_campaign_report (which gets report data), making the purpose specific and actionable.

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 lacks explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or when to prefer other tools like get_campaign_report. The context is only implied by the function name, which is insufficient for an AI to make informed selections among many siblings.

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