vast42_update_campaign_assignment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of explaining behavioral traits. It simply says 'Update' with no details on partial versus full replacement, idempotency, response behavior, or side effects. This is a critical gap for a mutation operation.

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 with no unnecessary filler. It is appropriately front-loaded with the action and resource, achieving maximum efficiency.

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?

For a 4-parameter update tool with no output schema and no annotations, this description is incomplete. It lacks critical information such as update semantics (partial vs full), the meaning of leaving fields unset, and what response the agent can expect. The schema provides parameter names but not operational context.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides (e.g., active, ad_item, campaign). It doesn't clarify update semantics for which fields are optional or how they interact.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'VAST 4.2 campaign assignment', making it easy to identify what the tool does. It is distinct from sibling operations like create/get/delete based on the verb, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternatives.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus create/get/delete, or any prerequisites such as requiring an existing assignment. The description offers no context for when an update is appropriate.

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