create_sp_campaigns

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

The description adds 'guarded write' and 'preview' capabilities and notes it is an 'introspection stub,' which provides behavioral context beyond the no-annotation baseline. However, it does not disclose permissions, side effects, or rate limits. For a creation tool, more detail on what actions are guarded and what happens on write would improve transparency.

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 long, front-loading the core purpose in the first sentence and adding essential context in the second. No redundant words. The use of brackets and slashes is compact but clear.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (5 optional params, no output schema, no annotations), the description could offer more details on the 'changes' parameter structure and return values. It adequately explains the stub nature and preview capability, but lacks complete guidance on what the tool returns or how to structure changes.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, each parameter already has a clear description. The tool description does not add new meaning to individual parameters beyond the schema. It provides overall context (preview vs. create, hosted stub) but that is separate from parameter semantics.

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 is for 'Preview or create Sponsored Products campaigns,' specifying the verb (preview/create) and resource (Sponsored Products campaigns). This distinguishes it from sibling tools for other ad types (e.g., create_sb_campaigns) and from other operations like archive or get.

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 implies when to use it (for Sponsored Products campaigns) through the resource name and context, but it does not explicitly exclude alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance. An explicit mention of 'use this for SP, not SB or SD' would elevate it to a 5.

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