get_campaigns

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

There are no annotations available, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It conveys that this is a non-mutating list operation and names its filters, but it does not mention pagination behavior, default limits, or what fields/campaign data are actually returned.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds relevant information. No filler or redundant explanation is present.

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 listing tool with three parameters and no nested objects, the description is mostly complete: it gives the output type and the available filters. The main gap is that no output schema exists and the description does not address pagination or field-level return details, but these are not critical for basic tool selection.

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 schema covers all three parameters, including enum values for state and campaignType, so schema coverage is high. The description mostly restates these filter options without adding meaningful new parameter semantics beyond what the schema already documents.

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 starts with a specific verb and resource: 'Retrieve a list of advertising campaigns from Amazon Ads.' This clearly identifies what the tool does and naturally distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_campaign_performance or get_report.

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 makes it clear that this tool is for retrieving campaigns and that state/type filters are optional. It does not explicitly name alternatives such as get_campaign_performance for performance data, so it stops short of the strongest guidance, but the core usage context is unambiguous.

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