draft_callouts

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

The description uses 'Draft' and 'returns a PREVIEW', which is ambiguous about side effects. Annotations indicate it is not read-only (readOnlyHint=false) and not destructive (destructiveHint=false), but the description does not clarify whether the tool actually creates callouts or only previews them, leaving behavioral uncertainty.

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 very concise (one sentence), but it omits essential information. While brevity is valued, it does not earn its place due to missing parameter and usage details.

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 the presence of an output schema, the description should still explain what 'callout assets' are and what the preview contains. The tool has 3 parameters with no explanation, making it incomplete for effective 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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no additional meaning for any of the three parameters. The agent must rely solely on parameter names (campaign_id, callouts, customer_id), which is insufficient for correct invocation.

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 it drafts campaign callout assets and returns a preview, using a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings by naming the asset type 'callouts', but does not explicitly contrast with other drafting tools like draft_sitelinks.

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. The description does not mention context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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