get_campaign_analytics

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly lists the returned metrics and computed rates, which is meaningful behavioral detail for a read-only analytics tool. It does not mention error handling or date-range edge cases, but the core behavior is transparent.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the core scope ('ONE campaign') followed by the return details. Every sentence contributes necessary information with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned counts and rates. For a simple analytics read tool, the invocation context (one campaign, optional date range) is sufficiently clear, though it could be even stronger with explicit guidance on sibling tools.

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%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It adds the date format (YYYY-MM-DD) and clarifies that the date range is optional, which helps, but it does not explain campaign_id explicitly or the exact semantics of start_date/end_date beyond being a range. Partial compensation only.

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 tool provides analytics for ONE campaign, distinguishing it from account-level or campaign-steps analytics siblings. It specifies the return content (counts and computed rates), making the purpose 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?

The phrase 'for ONE campaign over an optional date range' gives clear context for when this tool is appropriate: retrieving aggregate analytics for a single campaign. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the single-campaign scope is enough to guide selection among siblings like get_account_analytics or get_campaign_steps_analytics.

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