attach_shared_set_to_campaigns

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

Annotations indicate non-destructive mutation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). Description adds that it returns a preview and requires a separate confirmation step, providing valuable behavioral context beyond 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?

Description is clear and well-organized: brief intro, usage context, parameter details, and execution step. Slightly verbose but no wasted sentences. Front-loaded with the main action.

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 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, and presence of output schema (implied by preview), description covers required params, explains return type (preview), and links to confirmation tool. Could mention output schema fields but sufficient for agent to use.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description adds meaning: explains 'shared_set_id' is numeric ID from 'get_negative_keyword_lists', 'campaign_ids' is list of numeric campaign IDs, and 'customer_id' is optional. This clarifies parameter usage 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?

Description explicitly states the action: 'Attach an existing shared set to one or more campaigns.' It specifies creating CampaignSharedSet linkages and mentions a common use case (negative keyword lists). Clearly distinguishes from sibling tool 'detach_shared_set_from_campaigns'.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use guidance: 'most commonly used to attach a shared negative keyword list to newly-built campaigns.' Directs users to related tools for finding IDs and inspecting existing attachments. Clearly states that the call returns a preview and requires 'confirm_and_apply' to execute.

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