List campaigns, optionally filtered by client, platform, ad account or status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the backing endpoint (GET /v1/campaigns), which is modestly useful for debugging, but says nothing about ordering, default result limits, or pagination behavior for what is likely an unbounded list.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the filter list comes before the endpoint annotation. Slightly dense but appropriately sized for a list endpoint.

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?

Wait—reflecting complexity: with a read-only list tool, 5 optional params, no output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description is close to sufficient, but the undocumented crossCampaignId and absent pagination note leave real gaps. Score 3 (minimum viable plus), not 4.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It names four of the five filters (client, platform, ad account, status) and maps them to clear meanings, but omits crossCampaignId entirely, leaving an unexplained parameter, and gives no ID format or enum guidance beyond the schema.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ("List campaigns") plus the four filter axes, so an agent immediately knows this is a read-many endpoint. It stops short of distinguishing itself from siblings such as campaigns_get or analytics_breakdown, which also surface campaign data.

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?

"Optionally filtered by" implies the filters can be combined or omitted, giving implicit guidance on scoped vs. bulk listing. There is no explicit statement of when to prefer campaigns_get, no note on result volume or pagination, and no exclusions.

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