mailchimp_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It clearly enumerates what each action returns, including 'list' being newest-first and 'send_checklist' indicating blockers. However, it does not explicitly state that all actions are read-only or mention any side effects, though the nature of actions implies safe retrieval.

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 well-structured and appropriately sized for a multi-action tool. It front-loads the resource and quickly moves to the key differentiator (reports) before listing actions with concise parenthetical explanations.

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 has five distinct actions and no output schema, the description covers all actions and their outputs, plus provides starting guidance and a sibling pointer. It is complete enough for an agent to invoke actions correctly.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds substantial meaning to the 'action' enum by explaining each option in context, and clarifies that campaign_id comes from the list action. This goes beyond bare schema descriptions.

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 identifies the resource (campaigns) and provides specific actions (list, details, content, feedback, send_checklist) with their purposes. It distinguishes from sibling tool mailchimp_reports by explicitly steering performance data queries away.

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?

Explicitly names an alternative tool for performance data ('For performance data use mailchimp_reports instead'), and instructs to start with 'list' to obtain campaign_id. This gives clear when-to-use context.

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