list_all_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only states the listing scope. It does not mention whether archived or draft campaigns are included, pagination behavior beyond the schema parameters, or any side effects (though listing is implicitly read-only).

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 clear sentence with no filler. It front-loads the verb and resource and is appropriately sized for a simple listing tool.

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 core purpose and the schema handles parameters, but with no annotations and a large set of sibling listing tools, the description leaves ambiguity about what 'all types' includes and when to choose this over list_campaigns. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but not thorough.

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 has 100% description coverage, documenting limit and offset with defaults. The description adds no extra semantics about these parameters, so 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 uses the specific verb 'List' with resource 'all campaigns' and adds scope 'across all types'. It clearly communicates a broad listing operation and implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_campaigns that may be type-specific, though it doesn't name alternatives explicitly.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling listing tools (e.g., list_campaigns, vast_list_campaigns, draft_list_campaigns). It does not mention filtering, exclusions, or alternative tools, leaving the selection decision entirely to the agent.

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