Create campaign

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

Annotations already declare this is a mutating (readOnlyHint=false), non-destructive, open-world operation. The description adds two behaviorally important details not present in the structured data: the micro-currency money convention and the PAUSED-by-default creation behavior. It does not describe the response or post-creation side effects, keeping it short of a 5.

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?

Three short sentences, the action front-loaded first, followed by the two constraints that most affect correct invocation (units and default status). No filler or redundancy.

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 creation tool with rich nested schema documentation and annotations covering the safety profile, the description covers the highest-risk gotchas (currency units, default paused state). Without an output schema, one might want a note on the returned campaign ID, but the essentials are present.

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 100%, and the nested data object is documented exhaustively (objectives, bid strategies, scheduling, etc.), so the schema carries parameter semantics. The description only adds the micro-currency unit convention, which is relevant for money fields but otherwise marginal beyond the schema baseline.

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 (Create) and resource (campaign) in the title and first sentence, so the action is unambiguous. However it does not differentiate this tool from close siblings such as reddit_ads_create_ad_group or reddit_ads_create_ad, relying on the agent to infer the hierarchy.

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 instruction 'Create it PAUSED unless the user asks otherwise' gives a concrete default behavior, which is useful. But there is no guidance on when to use this versus update_campaign or create_ad_group, and no prerequisites are stated, so 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.