get_campaign_abuse_reports

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description need not repeat safety. It adds context about the specific data returned (abuse reports), which is beyond the annotation. No contradictions, and it does not conceal any behavioral traits.

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 and front-loaded with the main action, followed by usage guidance, parameter details, and return format. It is slightly lengthy but every sentence adds value.

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 parameters and an output schema, the description covers the return format (JSON with total_items and abuse_reports) and fields, providing sufficient context for effective usage. The output schema further reduces the burden.

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?

Given 0% schema description coverage, the description adds moderate value: it explains 'campaign_id' (where to obtain it) but does not mention the 'account' parameter. Thus, it partially compensates for the schema 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 lists abuse complaints for a sent campaign, uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('abuse reports'), and distinguishes from siblings 'get_campaign_abuse_report' and 'get_campaign_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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (to monitor deliverability health) and alternatives ('get_campaign_abuse_report' for single complaint, 'get_campaign_report' for overall stats), making it clear when to select this over similar tools.

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