ebay_get_email_campaign

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates this is a read-only operation. The description merely says 'Get', which is consistent but adds no additional behavioral context such as required permissions, rate limits, or response format. Since the annotation covers safety, the description adds no value beyond it.

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 concise sentence that front-loads the action ('Get email campaign'). There is no unnecessary detail, making it efficient and appropriately sized.

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?

This is a simple get-by-ID operation with one parameter and no output schema. The description is minimal but sufficient to understand the tool's purpose. However, it does not clarify what the response contains or how it relates to ebay_get_email_campaigns, which could confuse an agent. Given the low complexity, it is acceptable but not comprehensive.

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 input schema has one parameter with 100% description coverage ('emailCampaignId required endpoint parameter'), so the schema already documents it. The description does not add any extra meaning, such as how to obtain the ID or any format constraints. Baseline of 3 applies for high schema coverage, and no added value is provided.

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 verb 'Get' and resource 'email campaign' via the eBay Marketing API, so the purpose is unambiguous. However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling tool ebay_get_email_campaigns (plural), which likely lists all campaigns. The parameter emailCampaignId implies it fetches a single campaign by ID, but the description does not explicitly say that, leaving slight ambiguity.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it should be used when a specific campaign ID is known, nor does it reference ebay_get_email_campaigns for listing campaigns. No exclusions, alternatives, or context are given.

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