Browse Campaign Marketplace

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, indicating a safe read operation. The description reinforces this with 'Browse' and adds context about joining and earning, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as response format, pagination behavior, or any rate limits. Given annotations cover the safety profile, a 3 is appropriate.

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 a single concise sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the main action. However, it could be slightly more informative without increasing length, such as hinting at the return structure.

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 tool has two pagination parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the return format (e.g., list of campaigns with details), pagination behavior, or how to navigate results. The agent lacks sufficient context for correct invocation and interpretation.

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?

The input schema has two parameters (page, limit) with 0% description coverage in the schema. The description does not mention these parameters at all, leaving the agent with no guidance on their meaning, valid values, or behavior. For a browsing tool, this is a critical gap.

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 function: 'Browse available campaigns that you can join and earn from.' It uses specific verb 'Browse' and resource 'campaigns in marketplace,' distinguishing it from sibling tools like neuron_list_campaigns (which likely lists the user's own campaigns) and neuron_create_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 implies the tool is for exploring campaigns to join, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives such as neuron_list_campaigns or neuron_browse_pool. There is no guidance on when not to use this tool or any preconditions.

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