Get campaign results

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It does clearly imply a read-only retrieval of campaign run metricsaine, but it does not disclose response format, whether the report is generated on demand or precomputed, pagination, error behavior, or what happens if no results exist yet.

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?

One crisp sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource, and the parenthetical adds useful specificity without wasted words. No redundancy or filler.

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 simple single-parameter read tool, the description gives the core purpose and key result dimensionshare. However, with no output schema and no annotations, an agent still lacks guidance on parameter source, response shape, and edge cases like unfinished campaigns, so the definition is adequate but not complete.

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 should compensate by explaining campaignId. It does not even mention that the tool takes a campaign ID, leaving the schema property name as the only signal. The description adds no semantic detail beyond what the parameter name already reveals.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get the run results/report for a campaign,' and enumerates the exact metrics returned (sent/delivered/read/replies/clicks). This clearly differentiates it from sibling gambot_get_campaign, which would likely return campaign configuration rather than execution report data.

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 states what the tool does, but gives no guidance about when to choose it over alternatives such as gambot_get_campaign or gambot_list_campaigns. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context about campaign status requirements (e.g., must have been run already).

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