Fund Campaign

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

With no annotations, the description must bear full burden. It implies a transfer of funds but does not disclose side effects (e.g., status changes), failure modes, or reversibility. Critical details like required approval state are vague.

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?

A single sentence without superfluous words, effectively communicating the core action. No wasted text.

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 financial nature of the tool, the description lacks important context such as prerequisites, error conditions, and post-action effects. No output schema exists to supplement this.

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% with one parameter 'id'. The description adds context about 'approved campaign' which is not in the schema, but the parameter semantics remain minimal. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Fund', the resource 'an approved campaign', and the source 'from your wallet balance', making it specific and distinct from siblings like 'neuron_fund_wallet' or '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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify prerequisites like campaign approval or wallet balance requirements. The condition 'approved' is mentioned but not elaborated.

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