List campaigns

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already covers the read-only nature, and the description is consistent with it, adding that the tool returns id and name pairs. It provides a small amount of behavioral context via 'Start here' but does not disclose additional traits such as pagination, ordering, or whether this returns all campaigns. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded, and the workflow hint ('Start here') is placed second without redundancy.

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 parameterless list tool, the description adequately covers what it does and why an agent would use it first. It does not explicitly state that it returns all campaigns or describe an output structure beyond id/name, but the no-param schema and clear purpose make this sufficient for correct invocation.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty input schema, so there is nothing to document. The description adds no parameter details, but none are needed; a baseline of 4 is appropriate for a no-parameter tool.

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-resource pair ('List the outbound campaigns on the ICTBroadcast server') and explicitly names the returned data (id and name of each). The phrase 'Start here to find a campaign id' clearly positions this as the entry point, distinguishing it from the result/status/summary siblings that likely consume the campaign id.

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?

'Start here to find a campaign id' is an explicit usage instruction that tells an agent when to invoke this tool first. It gives clear context for the workflow, though it does not explicitly name the alternative sibling tools or state when not to use this one.

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