update_campaign_settings

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Update' implies a mutation, but it doesn't specify if this requires specific permissions, whether changes are reversible, or what the response looks like. It lacks details on rate limits, error handling, or side effects, leaving significant gaps for a mutation tool.

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 core action and includes helpful examples without any wasted words. It's appropriately sized for the tool's complexity and easy to parse.

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?

For a mutation tool with 8 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks behavioral context (e.g., permissions, side effects), detailed usage guidelines, and output information, making it inadequate for safe and effective use by an AI agent.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents all 8 parameters with descriptions. The description adds minimal value by hinting at the scope ('general settings') and examples like 'tracking, unsubscribe text', but doesn't provide additional syntax, constraints, or usage details beyond what's in the schema.

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 ('Update') and resource ('campaign general settings'), with specific examples like 'tracking, unsubscribe text, etc.' that help distinguish it from siblings like update_campaign_schedule or update_campaign_status. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all siblings (e.g., update_email_account), keeping it from a perfect score.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like update_campaign_schedule or update_campaign_status, nor does it mention prerequisites such as needing an existing campaign. It only states what the tool does, not when or why to use it.

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