ddb_list_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. While the verb 'List' implies a read-only operation, the description does not explicitly state that it is non-destructive, whether authentication is required, or any error/rate-limit behavior. It adds scope (as DM/player) but fails to disclose other relevant traits for a no-annotation tool.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundancy. It immediately states the action and resource, and the qualifying details ('as DM or player', 'with IDs and player counts') are packed efficiently. No filler or repetition.

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?

For a parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description provides the essential information: what it lists, the scope, and the returned fields. It does not mention pagination or error handling, but these are less critical for a simple read operation. The description is sufficient for an agent to call the tool correctly.

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?

With zero parameters, the baseline is 4 per the rubric. The description does not need to explain parameter meanings since there are none. Schema coverage is 100% implicitly, and no parameter documentation is required.

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 ('List'), a specific resource ('DnD Beyond campaigns'), and the exact scope ('the account is in (as DM or player)') plus what is returned ('IDs and player counts'). It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling ddb_list_campaign_characters, which lists characters rather than 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?

The description implies when to use this tool (when you need campaign listings), but does not explicitly state alternatives or exclusions. It does not say 'use this before calling ddb_list_campaign_characters' or any other routing guidance. The use case is reasonably obvious but not spelled out.

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