Get Campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds useful behavioral context by stating that results are paginated and includes defaults for pageNo and pageSize. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

The description is well-organized with a front-loaded one-line summary, an Args section, and a Returns section. It is appropriately sized for a five-parameter tool, though it duplicates some information already present in the input schema.

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?

Together with the schema and strong read-only annotations, the description covers the required adAccountId, optional filters, pagination behavior, defaults, and return shape at a useful level. It doesn't describe exact campaign fields returned, but this is not critical given no output schema and the simple list nature of the tool.

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 structured schema already documents all five parameters. The description largely repeats the schema's parameter summaries and defaults without adding deeper meaning, such as value semantics or relationships between parameters.

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 clearly states the verb ('Get'), the resource ('all campaigns'), and the scope ('for an ad account'), with optional filters. This immediately distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_campaign, update_campaign, get_ad_sets, and get_ads.

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 gives clear context for when to use the tool: to retrieve campaigns for a given ad account, with optional search, status, and pagination filters. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the usage intent is unambiguous.

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