list_campaigns

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

There are no annotations, so the description bears the transparency burden. It indicates a read-only list operation via 'List' and enumerates status filter values, but it does not mention pagination, ordering, or return format. The description is not misleading but leaves behavioral details to the schema.

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, compact sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and key optional filter. It avoids restating schema details or adding fluff, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 list tool without an output schema, the description provides a sufficient overview: it specifies the resource and optional status filtering. It does not cover pagination or default return size, but those are already defined in the schema, and the absence of complex side effects keeps the description complete enough.

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 100%, with all three parameters (count, offset, status) already described in the input schema. The description adds the status filter values but does not enhance understanding of count or offset beyond what the schema provides.

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 action (List) and resource (email campaigns), and specifies optional status filtering with exact status values (save, paused, schedule, sending, sent). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_audiences and list_templates, and from campaign-specific actions like send_campaign.

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 description implies the tool is used to retrieve campaign lists, optionally filtered by status, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. No exclusions or recommendations for sibling tools are provided, though the purpose is clear.

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