draft_get_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral disclosure burden. It implies read-only behavior via 'Get details' but does not state whether any permissions are required, what happens if the campaign does not exist, or what exactly 'details' includes. The lack of an output schema further compounds this.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler words. It efficiently communicates the core purpose without unnecessary detail, making it easy to parse.

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 tool is simple with one parameter and no output schema, but the description is minimal. It doesn't define what 'details' means or elaborate on the draft vs live campaign relationship, which is relevant given the large sibling set. Still, for a simple get, it meets the minimum viable threshold.

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 fully describes the single parameter `id` as 'Draft campaign ID', so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, which meets the baseline for high coverage. No compensation is needed.

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 action (Get details) and resource (a specific draft standard campaign), which is distinct from list operations like draft_list_campaigns. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from the non-draft get_campaign or explain the 'standard' qualifier, though the tool name provides some context.

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 get_campaign or draft_list_campaigns. The description does not explain the draft workflow, prerequisites, or situations where a different campaign getter would be more appropriate. This is a clear gap.

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