Change a budget

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=false already declares this is a mutation, and the description is consistent with that. It adds one genuine behavioral trait beyond the annotation: the operation must follow a confirmed preview. It omits reversibility, permission requirements, and what happens to the prior budget value.

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 sentence with no filler, and the core action is front-loaded ahead of the precondition. It is efficient, though arguably thinner than a mutation tool warrants.

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?

This is a mutating tool with no output schema and an effectively empty input schema, so the description carries nearly the whole burden. It supplies neither the arguments the agent must pass nor the effect of the change, which is inadequate for invoking a budget-changing operation reliably.

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 schema declares no properties while allowing additionalProperties, so the agent has no concrete field names, types, or required keys to work with. The description conveys the conceptual inputs (which campaign, what daily budget) but no syntax, currency, or naming, leaving real ambiguity about how to form the call.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: changing a campaign's daily budget. An agent can distinguish it from sibling mutation tools like pause_campaign or update_campaign_locations. It doesn't name a sibling it could be confused with, but the purpose itself is unambiguous.

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 'after you confirm a preview' implies a required workflow precondition, which is real usage guidance. However, it references a preview step no sibling tool in the list obviously provides, and it gives no when-not-to-use or alternative-selection guidance.

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