meta_campaign_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output metrics (spend, impressions, etc.) and implies a read-only operation. However, it does not disclose behavior around limit/pagination (default 25) or how 'all campaigns' reconciles with the limit parameter, nor any date/timezone handling.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and each word adds value. It lists the key metrics without unnecessary detail or repetition.

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?

As a simple read tool with a complete schema, the description adequately covers the core behavior. However, the phrase 'all campaigns' could mislead users into expecting all campaigns when the default limit is 25, and there is no clarification about pagination or that limit must be increased for truly all campaigns.

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 parameters are fully documented in the schema. The description adds context about the metrics but does not add additional meaning or syntax details for the parameters, aligning with the baseline for high schema coverage.

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 action ('Get') and the resource ('performance insights for all campaigns in a Meta ad account'), and lists the specific metrics returned. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like meta_adset_insights and meta_ad_insights by explicitly focusing on the campaign level.

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 for campaign-level insights but does not explicitly compare with adset or ad-level tools. There is no direct statement of when to use this tool versus alternatives, though the resource clarity helps infer it.

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