sf_campaign_roi

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

No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It does not state whether the tool is read-only, requires specific permissions, or has any side effects. For a calculation tool, it likely does not modify data, but this is not confirmed.

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 is front-loaded with the primary action. However, it could be more structured, e.g., listing parameters or providing an example.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description does not explain the return format or structure. The tool is moderately complex with 4 parameters, and the description omits what the agent can expect as output.

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 50% (only dateFrom and dateTo have descriptions). The description adds no parameter details beyond the schema. It does not explain campaignId (which campaign? ID format?) or limit (what is limited?), failing to compensate for low coverage.

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 calculates specific metrics (ROI, cost-per-lead, etc.) for campaigns, using a specific verb 'Calculate'. It distinguishes from siblings like sf_campaign_influence or sf_campaign_performance_trend, though it does not explicitly state it operates on a single campaign (implied by campaignId parameter).

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or prerequisites mentioned. The agent must infer from the tool name and parameters, which is insufficient.

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