get_campaign_performance

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

The description transparently indicates that the tool returns factual data and not predictions, and details the output (hook_type x creative_style performance). However, it does not explicitly state read-only behavior or lack of side effects, though it is implied by the nature of a 'get' operation.

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?

Two dense sentences convey all essential information without redundancy or extraneous details.

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 simple nature of the tool and single parameter, the description sufficiently covers what data is returned and how to invoke it. No output schema is provided, but the description enumerates the key output dimensions.

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 single parameter 'identifier' is fully described, including that partial name matching is allowed and that it refers to Meta campaign IDs. The description adds depth beyond the schema by clarifying the matching behavior.

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?

Clearly specifies the tool retrieves performance metrics (spend, CTR, creative breakdown) for the user's own campaigns, distinguishing it from competitor-related sibling tools by emphasizing 'OWN campaigns'.

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 how to reference campaigns (partial name or exact ID) and what kind of data it returns, providing clear context for when to use it. The phrase 'Facts only, no predictions' further clarifies its appropriate use.

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