List Campaigns

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the tool is safe. The description adds the status filter context but does not disclose pagination behavior, response format, or any other behavioral traits beyond what's in 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 a single efficient sentence. It is concise but lacks structure; adding a brief note on pagination could improve readability without adding much length.

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 no output schema, the description should convey more about pagination and return format. It is adequate for a simple list tool with readOnlyHint, but the lack of pagination details and output expectations makes it slightly incomplete.

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 33% (only status has a description). The description adds 'optional status filter' for the status parameter but does not explain page and limit parameters, which are pagination controls. Baseline is 3 due to low coverage, but description partially compensates for status yet fails for the other two parameters.

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 lists campaigns for your organization with an optional status filter. It distinguishes from sibling tools like neuron_get_campaign (single campaign) and other list tools by specifying the resource (campaigns).

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., neuron_get_campaign for a single campaign, or other list tools). No when-not-to-use or context hints are given.

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