archive_sd_campaigns

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

The description discloses that the tool is a 'guarded write' allowing preview before archiving, and clarifies it is an introspection stub. This adds behavioral context beyond the absent annotations, though it omits details like reversibility or side effects.

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 two sentences, front-loading the category and core action. It is concise and avoids redundancy, though the stub clarification could be more prominently placed.

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?

No output schema exists, and the description provides no information about return values, error handling, or the expected structure of 'changes'. For a tool with 5 parameters, this is insufficient 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 baseline is 3. The description's mention of 'preview or archive' loosely aligns with the 'preview' and 'dry_run' parameters but does not explain other parameters like 'changes' or 'reason' in detail.

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 explicitly states 'Preview or archive Sponsored Display campaigns', providing a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on SD campaigns and including a preview capability.

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 notes 'Hosted endpoint only; this local stdio server is an introspection stub', cautioning that the tool is non-functional on this server. However, it does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'archive_campaigns' or other archive tools.

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