create_linkedin_campaign

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

Annotations declare destructiveHint=true, consistent with the 'Create' action. However, the description does not disclose behavioral traits such as billing implications, required setup (e.g., ad account), or whether the campaign is created in draft or active state. With only destructiveHint, more context is needed.

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 sentence, concise and front-loaded. However, it is too minimal and could include more information without becoming verbose. A score of 5 would require every sentence to earn its place, but here the sentence is vague about purpose.

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?

The tool has 6 parameters (3 required) and no output schema, yet the description omits critical context such as prerequisites (e.g., needing an ad account), return value behavior, or the significance of 'B2B advertising'. It is not complete enough for an agent to use effectively.

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 all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning or context to any parameter. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Create' and the resource 'LinkedIn Ads campaign', which is specific. However, it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling campaign creation tools for other platforms (e.g., create_meta_campaign), though the mention of 'LinkedIn' helps. A higher score would require explicit sibling differentiation.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., other campaign creation tools). The description does not mention prerequisites, context, or exclusions. The agent must infer usage from the name alone.

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