Update Campaign

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

The description mentions it is idempotent (matching annotation idempotentHint: true) and notes that omitted fields are left unchanged. It also describes the return value structure and error case, adding value 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?

The description is a single paragraph of three sentences. It is front-loaded with the main action and lists important details concisely. It could be slightly tighter but is well-structured.

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's moderate complexity (7 parameters, 1 required), the description covers the key behaviors: patch semantics, return value shape, error condition, and when to use an alternative. No output schema exists, but the description explains the return value adequately.

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 only 14%, but the description lists the key fields (name, status, daily_budget, bidding_strategy, end_date) and notes that total_budget is not mentioned in the description. However, it adds context that field omission leaves them unchanged, which is not in the 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?

The description clearly states it is a 'Patch-update an existing campaign' with a specific verb ('Patch-update') and resource ('existing campaign'). It distinguishes from siblings by mentioning 'campaign_pause_resume for batch status changes'.

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 states when to use this tool (for partial updates) and when not to use it ('Prefer campaign_pause_resume for batch status changes'), providing an alternative tool name.

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