create_campaign_budget

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

With no annotations, the description discloses key behavioral traits: dry-run by default unless confirm=True, and the meaning of amount_micros and delivery_method. It does not mention side effects or return values, but the dry-run disclosure adds significant safety context.

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, front-loaded with the main action, and each sentence adds value: purpose, unit explanation, delivery method, and dry-run flag. No unnecessary words.

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?

The description covers essential usage details for a create operation with dry-run, but omits what the response will be and any prerequisites or error conditions. Given no output schema, that information could have been included.

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?

Despite 0% schema coverage, the description explains the non-obvious parameters: amount_micros (with example), delivery_method (allowed values), and confirm (dry-run behavior). It does not elaborate on name or customer_id, but those are straightforward.

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 the tool's purpose with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a campaign budget.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like update_campaign_budget and list_campaign_budgets by the action of creation.

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 context (creating a new budget) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives like update_campaign_budget. No exclusions or alternative mention, though the action of creation is clear.

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