delete_campaign_structure

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the destructive nature, the order of deletion, the dry-run safety mechanism via the 'confirm' parameter, and the behavior of 'delete_all_active'. It lacks details on reversibility or conflict handling but is adequate for safe invocation.

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 concise with a front-loaded purpose sentence followed by brief bullet point explanations of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and there is no redundant or extraneous information.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description provides sufficient context for invocation: it covers the action, parameter behavior, and safety mechanism. It omits the return value or status, but this is not critical for tool selection. Overall, it is reasonably complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It fully explains all 4 parameters: account_id, campaign_ids_json (with interaction with delete_all_active), delete_all_active, and confirm (dry run vs actual deletion). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's basic type and default information.

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 it deletes the entire campaign structure in the correct order (ads -> adsets -> campaigns). This is a specific verb ('delete') and resource ('campaign structure'), and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools, none of which are delete operations.

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 that this tool is used for deleting a campaign hierarchy, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools. However, since it is the only delete tool among siblings, the usage is implicitly clear.

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