li_list_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided. The description implies a read operation by listing campaigns, but does not explicitly state read-only behavior, rate limits, or pagination details. It returns specific fields but not the output format (e.g., array).

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, followed by returned data and filtering/alternative. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

The description covers the tool's purpose, inputs, and outputs sufficiently for a listing tool. However, it does not explicitly state the output is an array or mention pagination or sorting behavior. The return fields are listed but not structured.

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 75% (3 of 4 parameters described). The description mentions filtering by status and campaign_group_id, adding context to those parameters. However, it does not describe page_size or ad_account_id further, and the schema already covers parameter details.

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 uses the verb 'List' with the resource 'campaigns in a LinkedIn ad account', making the action and scope clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling li_get_campaign by noting that the latter provides full targeting detail.

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 states filtering options (status, campaign_group_id) and explicitly recommends li_get_campaign for full targeting detail. It lacks an explicit 'when not to use' statement, but the alternative is clearly given.

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