List campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on pagination behavior, default page size, result limits, or what happens when id filters are combined with pagination, despite the schema flagging these as meaningful controls.

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 sentence with zero filler; the resource and scope are front-loaded. It is efficient, though arguably so terse that it under-specifies rather than being perfectly sized.

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 five-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description omits what the response contains (campaign fields) and how pagination merging behaves across max_pages. The rich schema compensates for the parameter side, but the return-value gap keeps this at minimum-viable.

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 coverage is 100%: every parameter including defaults (REDDIT_ADS_ACCOUNT_ID, default 1 page, max 200 IDs) is documented in the schema itself. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 for full schema coverage applies.

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 verb (list) and resource (campaigns) with scope (in an ad account), so an agent can understand the operation. However, it does not differentiate from close siblings like reddit_ads_get_campaign or reddit_ads_list_ad_groups, leaving disambiguation to the tool name.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of when NOT to use it, and no reference to alternatives such as get_campaign (single campaign) or query tools. Usage is only weakly implied by the word 'List'.

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