Delete a campaign

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

The description goes beyond the annotations by adding that deletion is permanent and not reversible, requires the campaigns:write scope, and should be preceded by pausing if the campaign is running. These are operationally important details not present in the structural fields.

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?

Every sentence carries useful information: what it does, the safety precondition, the consequence, and the required scope. There is 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?

For a one-parameter deletion tool with destructive and idempotent annotations, the description covers all essential operational context: behavior, prerequisite, irreversibility, and permission requirements.

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 already fully documents the single required id parameter with an example. The description does not add parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable given 100% schema coverage.

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 verb ('delete') and resource ('campaign'), and 'Permanently' clarifies the operation's finality. This distinguishes it from campaign lifecycle tools like pause_campaign, update_campaign, or delete_lead.

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?

It provides an explicit precondition: 'Pause it first if it is running.' The irreversibility warning also implies caution against using this when a temporary stop is sufficient, though it does not explicitly name pause_campaign as the alternative.

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