ebay_get_campaign

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates that this is a read operation, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond restating the get semantics. It does not mention what the response contains, whether authentication is required, or how errors surface. There is no contradiction with the annotations, but the description itself contributes little.

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 short sentence with no wasted words and is easy to scan. It is appropriately compact, though it is so sparse that it carries little information beyond the tool name.

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?

For a one-parameter, read-only tool with full schema coverage, this is minimally viable: an agent can invoke it once it inspects the schema. However, within a large sibling set containing several campaign-fetching tools, the lack of selection guidance and return-value information leaves clear 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?

The schema covers the single campaignId parameter, so the baseline is 3 even though the tool description adds no parameter-level detail. The schema's parameter description is somewhat tautological, but the parameter name and required flag provide enough basic information for invocation.

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 a clear action and resource: 'Get campaign through the eBay Marketing API.' It is not a bare tautology and the singular 'campaign' suggests this retrieves one campaign. However, it does not specify that identification is by campaignId or differentiate this tool from siblings like ebay_get_campaigns or ebay_get_campaign_by_name.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ebay_get_campaigns, ebay_get_campaign_by_name, or ebay_find_campaign_by_ad_reference. No exclusions, prerequisites, or typical use cases are provided.

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