Get Campaigns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, but it merely restates that the tool returns campaigns with filtering. It does not disclose pagination behavior, default sttus scope, or whether this is purely read-only; the schema hints at pagination but the description adds no behavioral context.

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 sentence, front-loaded with action and resource, no filler. Despite its brevity, every word contributes.

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 5-param tool with sibling ambiguity (campaign_summary) and no annotations, the single sentence is underspecified. The output schema covers return shape, but the description still leaves the agent guessing about pagination defaults, status behavior, and when to pick this tool over get_campaign_summary.

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%, so the schema documents all five parameters in detail. The description's 'optional filtering' is a general nod to search/status parameters but adds no meaning beyond the schema, hence the baseline 3.

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 action ('Get') and resource ('campaigns') scoped to an ad account, and mentions optional filtering. It clearly names the primary object but does not distinguish itself from sibling get_campaign_summary, leaving some ambiguity about list vs summary.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this tool over siblings such as get_campaign_summary or get_ads; no explicit exclusions or preferred use cases. The only context is 'for an ad account', but that applies equally to sibling tools.

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