List Campaigns

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

Annotations already declare read-only, non-destructive, idempotent behavior. The description adds value by detailing the return structure and pagination mechanics. There is no contradiction with 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 and front-loaded, covering purpose, filters, pagination, return format, and usage with siblings. It is concise but could be slightly trimmed without losing information.

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?

With no output schema, the description adequately explains the return object. Parameters are partially detailed, but the enum mismatches create gaps. Given the complexity (5 params, cross-platform), more precision is needed.

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?

The schema coverage is 60%, but the description provides additional enum values for platform and status that contradict the schema: description says 'google_ads'|'meta_ads' while schema uses 'google'|'meta'; status lists different set. This mismatch reduces reliability and usefulness.

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 campaigns across Google Ads and Meta Ads in a unified view. It uses a specific verb (list) and resource (campaigns), and distinguishes from siblings by emphasizing the cross-platform aggregation.

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 explains when to use (unified listing across platforms) and provides context on optional filters. It also suggests follow-up tools using the returned id. However, it does not explicitly exclude scenarios or compare with other listing/reporting siblings.

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