tiktok get campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description is consistent with them. The description adds the concrete returned field list, but since an output schema exists, this is modest extra behavioral context; pagination and status filtering behavior are left to the schema.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words or redundant restatement of the tool name. It communicates action, scope, and return contents efficiently.

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?

This is a low-complexity read-only list operation with rich parameter descriptions, strong annotations, and an output schema. Nothing critical is missing for an agent to select and invoke it correctly, and the resource name 'campaigns' makes the intended target unambiguous.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage for all three parameters, including limit bounds and statusFilter enum semantics, so the schema carries the parameter-level explanation. The description only echoes the advertiser account scope without adding further parameter detail, so a baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states a specific verb ('List'), a resource ('campaigns'), a scope ('for a TikTok advertiser account'), and the main returned fields (ID, name, status, budget, objective). This makes it immediately distinguishable from sibling tools like tiktok_get_ads and tiktok_get_adgroups.

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 intended use case is inferable from the description and the required advertiserId, but there is no explicit statement of when to choose this tool over alternatives. It does not mention exclusions or sibling tools, so usage guidance is implied rather than stated.

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