add_campaign_leads

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

Annotations supply the safety profile (non-read-only, idempotent, non-destructive), and the description adds real behavioral detail beyond them: batch atomicity ('whole batch fails if any id belongs to another account'), dedup behavior for repeated ids, and the caveat that adding a lead does not re-qualify opted-out or closed leads. It stops short of describing permissions or partial-success reporting.

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?

Four short, front-loaded sentences with no filler; the batch size constraint leads and each subsequent sentence adds a distinct behavioral rule.

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?

With an output schema present, return values need not be explained, and the description covers the key semantic edges (batch size, atomic failure, dedup, eligibility). Missing only auth/permission expectations and any campaign-state side effects, which are minor for this scope.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden and only partially compensates: it bounds lead_ids to 1-100 and ties ids to 'this account', but says nothing about the account or campaign_id parameters beyond incidental mention.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: adding 1-100 local leads from an account to a campaign. The batch bound and 'local leads' scope make the operation concrete, though it never names or distinguishes itself from close siblings like upsert_lead or list_leads.

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?

Usage is implied by the batch/atomicity constraints, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus upsert_lead or update_lead_status, and no prerequisites or preconditions (e.g., campaign must exist/is active) are stated.

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