create_campaign

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that this is a HIGH_WRITE operation, that campaigns are created in a PAUSED state, and that a sensible schedule and single-step sequence are auto-generated. These are meaningful behavioral traits beyond the schema. It does not explain confirmation or error behavior, but the core write and side-effect profile is clear.

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 compact and front-loaded: key facts (HIGH_WRITE, created PAUSED) come first, followed by convenience and full-control usage in a tight structure. Every sentence earns its place and no filler is present.

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 description covers the core creation flow and side effects well, but it leaves the `confirm` parameter unexplained, which could be operationally important for a high-write tool. It also does not describe the return value or error conditions, though there is no output schema to fall back on.

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%, and the description compensates well by explaining the role of name, subject, and body, and by giving inline shapes for schedule and sequences. However, the `confirm` and `timezone` parameters are not explained; `confirm` is especially ambiguous given the HIGH_WRITE label.

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 operation with a specific verb and resource ('Create a campaign') and adds distinguishing behavioral detail ('Created PAUSED — launch separately'). It does not explicitly contrast itself with siblings like preview_campaign_build or update_campaign, but the create semantics are unambiguous.

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?

It provides clear usage context: the convenience path for minimal arguments versus the full-control path with schedule and sequences. It also explicitly instructs that creation is separate from launching. It does not name alternative siblings for when not to use this tool, but the guidance is sufficient for the common decision.

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