create_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It clearly conveys that this is a create/mutation operation, but it does not mention cost implications, status defaults, failure/validation behavior, idempotency, authentication, or what the caller receives on success.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action, resource, scope, and key prerequisites are stated efficiently.

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?

This is a complex mutation tool: 22 parameters, a nested targeting object, no output schema, and no annotations. A single sentence omits operational context such as expected return values, validation failures, billing/activation consequences, and workflow positioning relative to campaign groups and creatives.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents every parameter. The description only names three high-level requirement categories (targeting, budget, objective type), which adds no meaning beyond the formal required fields.

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 states a specific action (creates), a clear resource (LinkedIn ad campaign), and a precise context (within a campaign group), which differentiates it from create_campaign_group and update_campaign. It is immediately clear what this tool does.

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 gives prerequisites ('Requires targeting criteria, budget, and objective type') but no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings like update_campaign, create_campaign_group, or list_campaigns. No exclusions or alternative conditions are provided.

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