List RSS auto push campaigns

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

Annotations already mark it as readOnly and openWorld, so the safety profile is known. The description goes beyond annotations by disclosing pagination behavior via `has_more`, the inclusion of `feed_url` per item, and the status filter semantics mirroring dashboard tabs, providing useful operational context without contradicting the annotations.

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 three concise sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, followed by specific details. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy or fluff.

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 read-only list operation with a complete schema and annotations, the description adequately covers the resource type, pagination, filter behavior, and item contents. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be described in prose, so no critical information is missing.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal extra parameter context beyond what the schema provides, mostly the 'dashboard filter tabs' analogy for status, but does not meaningfully enhance understanding of page, limit, or site_id.

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 uses the specific verb 'Lists' tied to the resource 'RSS auto push campaigns' on the current site, clearly distinguishing it from sibling list tools like list_drip_campaigns and list_triggered_campaigns. It also includes pagination and filter details that further specify the scope.

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 provides clear context on what the tool does and its parameters (status filter, pagination), and implies it should be used for RSS auto push campaigns specifically. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, unlike a perfect score would require.

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