get_campaign_feedback

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive, but description adds value by stating 'Read-only, safe to retry' and mentioning API key authentication and max 10 concurrent requests, providing behavioral context beyond 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?

Extremely concise: two sentences for purpose and guidelines, followed by bulleted args with return format. Front-loaded with key information. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 simple retrieval tool with output schema, description fully covers input parameters, usage context, auth, rate limits, and return fields. No gaps identified for its complexity level.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description provides detailed parameter explanations: campaign_id from list_campaigns, feedback_id from list_campaign_feedback, and account with environment variable configuration. Adds significant meaning beyond the raw 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?

Description clearly states 'Retrieve a single team feedback comment on a campaign' with specific verb and resource. Distinguishes itself from sibling tool list_campaign_feedback by noting it retrieves full text/meta versus discovering IDs.

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?

Explicitly says when to use this tool (read one feedback) and when to use sibling (list to discover IDs). Also includes authentication method and concurrent request limit, guiding proper usage.

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