activate_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose the key behavioral fact that this resumes ad spending (a real financial side effect) plus the gating prerequisites. It still omits permission/scope requirements, idempotency, and what happens on failure or if the campaign is already active.

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?

Three tight sentences, front-loaded with the action, then the precondition, then the confirm workflow. No filler and no repetition of name or title.

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 mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the critical items: the spending side effect, prerequisites, and the confirm gate. It is still silent on return value, error conditions, and interaction with the bulk status sibling, so it is not fully self-sufficient.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It does explain the non-obvious parameter, confirming exactly when and why to set confirm=True (after reviewing in Ads Manager), which the schema's bare boolean/default=false leaves unsaid; campaign_id is self-evident from its name but never described.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ("Activate (unpause) a Meta campaign") and disambiguates the terminology with the "unpause" synonym, which is genuinely useful. It does not distinguish itself from the sibling bulk_update_campaign_status, which can also change campaign status, so the sibling differentiation is incomplete.

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?

Gives concrete preconditions (valid payment method, approved creatives) and a workflow instruction (review in Ads Manager then set confirm=True). It does not say when to prefer this over bulk_update_campaign_status or what to do if the campaign is already active.

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