google_ads_duplicate_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so description carries full burden. It notes the new campaign is created in PAUSED status, which is helpful. However, it does not detail what 'all settings' includes or potential side effects like budget duplication.

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?

Description is concise with no fluff: short sentences, structured with Args, Returns, Note. Every sentence adds value.

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 complexity of a duplication tool with 4 params and output schema present, the description covers key points: parameter details, return value, and safety note. Minor omission: no mention of prerequisites (e.g., campaign must exist) but overall adequate.

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 coverage is 0%, so description fully compensates. Each parameter is explained: customer_id format, campaign_id purpose, new_name purpose, and include_ad_groups with default value. This adds significant meaning beyond 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 'Duplicate an existing campaign with all settings', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like create_campaign or update_campaign by implying copying an existing one.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like create_campaign or batch_create_campaigns. It lacks context for when-not to use or which scenarios are appropriate.

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