bulkActivateCampaigns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It transparently states that activating is the action and that dry-run previews changes, which is useful. It does not cover failure behavior, partial success, or reversibility, so it is only partially transparent.

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 no wasted words; the core purpose is front-loaded and the dry-run capability is added as a useful second sentence.

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 two-parameter bulk mutation with no annotations or output schema, the description gives the essential what and the dry-run mode, but omits return shape, partial-failure semantics, and any side effects beyond activation. This is adequate but not complete.

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 the input schema already documents campaignIds and dryRun fully. The description only restates the dry-run concept without adding format or edge-case meaning, meeting the baseline but not exceeding it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Activate') with a plural resource ('multiple campaigns') and states the batch nature, clearly distinguishing it from the singular sibling activateCampaign. This is unambiguous.

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 phrase 'in a single operation' implies this tool is for bulk activation rather than the singular activateCampaign, and the dry-run mention gives a concrete use case. However, it does not explicitly state when to prefer alternatives or when not to use it.

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