get_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the return contents (schedule, sequences, status) but does not mention potential errors, authentication needs, or response format. For a read-only getter, this is adequate but not rich.

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 that front-loads the verb and resource, includes useful detail in parentheses, and contains no filler or redundancy. It is appropriately sized for the simplicity of the tool.

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?

For a simple single-parameter getter with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides the essential purpose and return scope (full configuration with schedule, sequences, status). It does not mention error handling or id format, but these are minor gaps for a straightforward retrieval tool.

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 does not elaborate on the campaign_id parameter beyond the schema's title 'Campaign Id'. It does not explain the parameter's format, origin, or how to obtain it, leaving the agent to rely on the tool name for meaning.

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 states a specific verb ('Get'), a specific resource ('one campaign's full configuration'), and the scope ('one') that distinguishes it from list_campaigns and the analytics sibling tools. The parenthetical '(schedule, sequences, status)' further clarifies what is included, leaving no ambiguity about the tool's function.

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?

Usage is implied by the singular 'one campaign' and the focus on configuration, which suggests it should be used when retrieving a specific campaign's setup rather than listing campaigns or fetching analytics. However, there is no explicit mention of when not to use it or which sibling tool to use instead, so the guidance is only implicit.

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