get_campaign_performance

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

With no annotations, the description partially discloses behavior: it states the tool computes aggregates (implying read-only), but does not mention permissions, error handling, latency, or dependencies. Adequate but not comprehensive.

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 sentence with no filler, efficiently conveying the tool's purpose and key outputs. It is well-structured and front-loaded.

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 simple tool with one input and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers core functionality and return values (impressions, clicks, CTR, unique reach). However, it lacks details on data aggregation period or filtering, which would enhance completeness.

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 0%, and the description adds context ('for a campaign') but does not detail the 'campaignId' parameter format or constraints. Since there is only one parameter, the minimal added meaning is acceptable but not compensatory beyond baseline.

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 computes aggregate performance for a campaign and lists specific metrics (impressions, clicks, CTR, unique reach), using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_offer_performance by specifying 'campaign'.

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 vs alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or provide explicit comparisons to sibling tools such as 'get_campaign' or 'get_offer_performance'.

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