draft_list_campaigns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly states the scope (draft standard campaigns) but does not disclose potential behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, ordering, or that the operation is read-only. The limit/offset parameters imply pagination, but this is not explicitly stated.

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, telegraphic sentence that starts with the verb and conveys the entire scope. No filler or 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 lack of an output schema and annotations means the description must carry more context. While it is adequate for a simple list operation, it could benefit from a note on what constitutes a 'standard' campaign or how it differs from list_campaigns. It is minimally complete but not rich.

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?

Both parameters (limit and offset) have complete descriptions in the schema, so the description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'List all draft standard campaigns' clearly states a specific verb ('List') and resource ('draft standard campaigns'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_campaigns and vast_list_campaigns. It precisely indicates the scope (draft status and standard type).

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 implies usage for retrieving draft standard campaigns, but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when to choose this over list_campaigns or list_all_campaigns. It lacks 'use this when' or 'instead of' guidance.

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