create_sb_campaigns

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

The description reveals it's an introspection stub and emphasizes 'guarded write', hinting at safety measures. However, it lacks details on side effects, required permissions, or what happens during preview vs. actual creation. Without annotations, the description partially compensates but is insufficient.

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?

Two impactful sentences: first clearly states purpose; second adds essential context about hosted endpoint and stub nature. No redundancy or filler.

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?

With no output schema, no annotations, and 5 parameters, the description is too brief. It fails to explain return values, error handling, or the structure of 'changes'. The tool's complexity demands more guidance.

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?

All 5 parameters are described in the schema (100% coverage), so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, such as clarifying the 'changes' array structure or 'reason' usage.

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 tool previews or creates Sponsored Brands campaigns, with a mention of 'guarded write' and 'introspection stub', distinguishing it from sibling tools like archive or update. However, it could be more explicit about what 'preview' entails.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_sb_ad_groups or other create tools. It does not specify prerequisites, context, or when not to use. The mention of 'hosted endpoint only' hints at a limitation but not when to choose this over other tools.

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