get_campaigns

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It does not state pagination behavior, default result scope, that limit defaults to 50, or how ad_account_id constrains results, leaving the agent with little beyond the fact that filters are optional.

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?

A single efficient sentence with the resource and filter capability front-loaded and no wasted words. It is lean to the point of being under-specified, but it is structurally sound.

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 four parameters at 0% schema coverage and no annotations, the description should clarify scope (ad_account_id), result limits, and filtering syntax. An output schema exists so return values needn't be described, but the input-side gaps are substantial for a tool with this many siblings.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, yet it only alludes to status and objective and mentions nothing about limit or ad_account_id. No accepted value formats or defaults are conveyed for any parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (get campaigns) plus the filtering capability, which signals a list operation rather than a single-record fetch. It does not, however, name the closely related sibling get_campaign_details or otherwise say how it differs from a detail lookup.

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 phrase 'with optional status/objective filters' implies you can narrow results, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no exclusions, and no mention of the alternative get_campaign_details or get_campaign_templates. Usage is only implied.

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