List campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds value by specifying that monetary fields are returned in account currency units, but does not discuss other behavioral traits like pagination or rate limits.

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 tool's purpose and filtering options, then adding a precise detail about currency units. Every sentence is informative and there is no redundancy.

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 (8 optional parameters, no output schema), the description provides essential context about return values (currency units). However, it omits details on pagination behavior (limit, offset, autoPaginate) which are only in the schema.

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 coverage is 100%, so the schema documents all 8 parameters. The description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining that monetary fields (e.g., DailyBudget.Amount, Funds) are in account currency units, which aids understanding of return value format in the absence of an output schema.

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 'Lists campaigns' with specific optional filters (id, type, state, status). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like list_ad_groups or get_statistics by focusing on the campaign resource.

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 usage via 'Lists campaigns' but does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternative tools (e.g., campaign_action for updates) despite 39 siblings.

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