Retrieve broadcast campaigns newest first, optionally filtered by broadcast stream, to review email delivery through CamelMailer.
List broadcast campaigns, newest first. Pass stream to narrow to one broadcast stream.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| stream | No | Limit to one broadcast stream |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already mark the tool as read-only and open-world, covering the safety profile. The description adds useful behavior details like newest-first ordering and stream narrowing, but doesn't disclose pagination, limits, or return shape. No contradiction with 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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The action and scope are front-loaded, and the second sentence earns its place by explaining the only parameter.
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 simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers purpose, ordering, and filtering. It doesn't explicitly state that omitting stream returns all campaigns or describe returned fields, but those are inferable and no output schema exists.
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%, and the schema already describes stream as 'Limit to one broadcast stream.' The description repeats the same concept with 'narrow,' adding no new semantic detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 3 applies.
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 a specific verb ('List'), identifies the resource ('broadcast campaigns'), and states ordering ('newest first'), making the tool's purpose immediately clear. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools such as list_streams and get_campaign.
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 explains exactly how to use the optional stream parameter: 'Pass stream to narrow to one broadcast stream.' It gives clear invocation context but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives like get_campaign for a single campaign or state when not to use this tool.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.