reddit get campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavior beyond that: results are paginated with an opaque cursor and every additional page requires an explicit follow-up call, which is exactly the operational detail an agent needs to avoid assuming auto-pagination.

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?

Two tight sentences with zero filler. Scope and return content come first, pagination caveat second — front-loaded and every clause carries information.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, and all three parameters are documented. The description covers scope and pagination adequately, though it says nothing about permission requirements or what happens with an expired/invalid cursor for this ad-account-scoped read.

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% — limit ranges, cursor opacity and the adAccountId format/prefix are all documented in the schema. The description only echoes the cursor behavior, adding no new parameter meaning, so the baseline 3 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read Reddit campaigns') plus the data surfaced (native configuration, configured/effective status). This implicitly separates it from the singular sibling reddit_get_campaign, but the list-vs-single distinction is left to the tool name rather than stated explicitly.

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 pagination sentence tells the agent how to continue iterating (opaque cursor, explicit call per page), which is genuine usage guidance. However, there is no explicit when-to-use framing and no named alternative, e.g. it never says to use reddit_get_campaign for a single campaign or which tool to pick when the campaign ID is already known.

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