Discounts: create campaign

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

The description discloses that the tool creates a draft without sending or charging, returns dispatches and offers, and locks in the recipient audience. Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true) are consistent; the description adds context about side effects (locking audience, no charge). No contradictions.

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 a single paragraph with all essential information front-loaded. Each sentence adds value (purpose, workflow, return types, next steps). No redundancy or filler.

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?

Despite no output schema, the description adequately explains return values (dispatches with id, status, recipient count; offers with price). It covers the workflow, prerequisites (check eligibility), and distinguishes from sibling tools. For a 3-parameter tool with high schema coverage, this is complete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema (e.g., 'list of listing IDs selected for the campaign'). However, it does not explain parameter usage beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it 'Creates a draft discount/special-offer messenger campaign for a list of listings (multi_create).' It specifies the action (creates draft), resource (campaign for listings), and distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'msg_discounts_open_api_multi_confirm' by noting this is the first step that does not send or charge.

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 provides clear workflow context: 'This is the FIRST step — the campaign is NOT sent yet and no money is charged.' It explains the next step (pick an offer and confirm via another tool) and mentions checking eligibility via a different tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or provide alternatives beyond the sibling confirm tool.

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