update_campaign_schedule

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states it 'updates' settings without disclosing behavioral traits like permission requirements, whether changes are reversible, rate limits, or error handling. It mentions the fields but not the consequences of updates.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the purpose and enumerates the main fields without unnecessary words. Every part earns its place by specifying the scope of updates.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and a mutation tool with 8 parameters, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral context, return values, error cases, or how it fits with sibling tools, leaving significant gaps for agent understanding.

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 parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description lists key fields (timezone, days, hours, lead limits) which align with some parameters but adds minimal semantic value beyond what the schema already provides, meeting the baseline.

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 action ('update') and resource ('campaign schedule settings') with specific fields mentioned (timezone, days, hours, lead limits). It distinguishes from some siblings like 'update_campaign_settings' by focusing on schedule aspects, though not all alternatives are explicitly differentiated.

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 use this tool versus alternatives like 'update_campaign_settings' or 'update_campaign_status' is provided. The description implies usage for modifying schedule parameters but offers no context about prerequisites, exclusions, or specific scenarios.

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