snapchat get campaigns

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuine behavioral fact, that results retain full native configuration rather than a normalized shape; the pagination mention largely restates the cursor/next_cursor contract already in the schema, and nothing is said about ordering or empty-result behavior.

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 short sentences with the core action and scope front-loaded and no filler. The ad-squad taxonomy sentence is slightly tangential to listing campaigns but does earn some place as a hierarchy hint.

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?

With an output schema present and rich annotations, the description needn't explain return values, and it correctly focuses on scope and data fidelity. It would be stronger if it positioned the tool relative to the adsquad and ad listing tools in the same hierarchy.

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% and all three parameters carry their own descriptions, including the adAccountId UUID warning and the opaque-cursor note. The description mentions next_cursor but adds no syntax, format or default information beyond what the schema provides, 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?

The description gives a specific verb and resource ("List Snapchat campaigns") plus a scope ("in the selected account"), which clearly distinguishes it from the ad-squad and ad siblings. The second sentence about ad squads implies campaigns sit above ad squads in the hierarchy, but it never names snapchat_get_adsquads or snapchat_get_ads explicitly, so differentiation is inferred rather than stated.

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?

Usage is only implied by the phrase "in the selected account" and by the requirement for an adAccountId. The description never states when to choose this tool over snapchat_get_adsquads or snapchat_get_ads, nor does it give any exclusion or prerequisite guidance beyond what the schema already enforces.

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