create_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully covers behavioral traits: creates in draft status, requires content before sending, authenticates via API key, respects rate limits (max 10 concurrent), supports read-only/dry-run modes, and returns error for invalid list_id. This compensates for the lack of 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 well-structured with overview, workflow, parameter list, returns, and example. It is thorough but slightly lengthy; some minor redundancy (e.g., 'e.g.' examples) could be trimmed, but overall it balances detail with readability.

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's complexity (7 parameters, 2 required) and the presence of an output schema, the description covers purpose, workflow, parameter details, return fields, example usage, authentication, rate limits, and error handling. It is complete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

Although schema description coverage is 0%, the description provides detailed semantics for all 7 parameters (e.g., list_id obtained from list_audiences, subject_line under 150 chars, defaults for optional fields, segment_id from list_segments). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema.

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 that the tool creates a new regular email campaign in draft status, optionally targeting a segment. This specific verb+resource+scope distinguishes it from siblings like replicate_campaign (clone) and set_campaign_content (set content).

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?

Provides explicit workflow: create_campaign -> set_campaign_content -> send_test_email -> send_campaign/schedule_campaign. It notes when to use replicate_campaign instead and that the campaign cannot be sent until content is set. Also mentions authentication and rate limits.

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