Pause a campaign

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

The annotation already marks this as a non-read-only operation (readOnlyHint=false), so the agent knows it mutates state. The description adds the behavioral detail that it stops spending, but does not cover reversibility, required permissions, or what happens if the campaign is already paused.

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 definition is a single sentence with no wasted words. The action and its purpose are front-loaded, which is exactly what an agent needs for quick selection.

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 simple mutation tool with no output schema and annotations covering the safety profile, the description is largely sufficient. However, it does not explain how the target campaign is identified despite having no parameters, leaving a gap in invocation 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?

The input schema has zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. Per the rubric, a 0-param tool receives a baseline of 4; the description does not need to compensate for schema gaps.

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 states a specific verb (pause) and resource (a running campaign), and adds the effect (stops spending). An agent can distinguish this from resume_campaign and launch_campaign without opening any schema.

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 phrase 'so it stops spending' implies the intended use case, but the description does not explicitly name alternatives or conditions when not to use it. With a sibling 'resume_campaign' present, a routing cue would have been helpful.

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