get_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It only says 'Get campaigns for a customer,' which implies a read operation but does not disclose any behavioral details such as return format, pagination, filtering, or permissions. The description essentially restates the tool name without adding meaningful context.

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 a single short sentence ('Get campaigns for a customer') that is front-loaded and contains no redundant words. It is efficiently structured and easy to parse.

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 read tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it could be more complete by explicitly stating that it returns a list of campaign objects, and by noting any differences from performance reporting tools. The lack of return value documentation and usage context makes it somewhat incomplete.

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 fully documents customerId with a description ('Google Ads customer ID (10 digits)'), resulting in 100% schema coverage. The description's 'for a customer' aligns with this parameter but adds no additional semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get campaigns for a customer' clearly states the action (get), resource (campaigns), and scope (customer). It is specific enough to distinguish from sibling tools like get_campaign_performance, which focuses on performance metrics rather than campaign objects. However, it could be slightly more explicit about returning a list of campaigns.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention if it should be used instead of get_campaign_performance, get_ad_groups, or others, nor does it state any prerequisites or exclusions. The only implied context is that a customerId is required.

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