Create a campaign

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

Annotations already mark this as a write operation (readOnlyHint: false), but the description adds valuable behavioral context: creating does not start dialing, scheduled_at controls immediate versus scheduled start, and the campaigns:write scope is required. This goes beyond the structured fields and helps the agent set expectations.

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 compact and front-loaded with the most important caveat: 'Creating does NOT dial anyone.' Every sentence adds useful information, and the scope requirement is cleanly separated. There is no repetition of schema details or annotation facts.

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 creation tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description covers the key behavioral distinction from start_campaign, scheduling semantics, and scope requirements. It is sufficient for an agent to select and call the tool correctly, though it does not describe the response shape or what happens after creation.

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 50%, with lead_ids and scheduled_at already described. The description adds meaning by linking lead_ids to 'every listed lead' and clarifying scheduled_at semantics with 'Without scheduled_at the campaign is ready to start immediately,' but it does not elaborate on name or agent_id beyond their obvious roles.

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 states a specific action ('Create a campaign') and a concrete resource behavior: it will call every listed lead with an agent. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling start_campaign by explicitly noting that creating does NOT dial anyone, so an agent can tell the two apart.

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 gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance: use create_campaign to set up, and call start_campaign when the user is ready to spend. It also explains the scheduled_at behavior, which helps the agent decide whether to include that parameter.

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