meta_ads_campaigns_create

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the action is mutating, reversible via rollback_apply (which sets status to PAUSED, not delete), default status is PAUSED, and budget mutual exclusivity. It does not mention permissions or rate limits, but covers key behavioral aspects well.

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 concise with no fluff: four sentences that each add essential information (creation, return value, rollback, default status, relationships to other tools). It is front-loaded with the core purpose and efficiently conveys all necessary context.

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 and no annotations, the description provides comprehensive context: it describes the return value, rollback behavior, default status, budget constraints, necessary follow-up steps to create ad sets and ads, and key parameter details. This covers the main questions an agent would have when using this 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 100%, but the description adds significant value beyond the schema: it explains that account_id is optional and falls back to credentials, warns about deprecated objective names, clarifies that budgets are in minor units and mutually exclusive, and notes that budgets can be on campaign or ad set. This greatly aids correct parameter usage.

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 verb 'Creates' and the resource 'campaign' in 'Creates a new campaign in the specified Meta Ads account. Returns the new campaign id.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like meta_ads_campaigns_enable or meta_ads_campaigns_list by focusing on creation and return of the id.

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 provides explicit guidance: default status PAUSED, warning to only set ACTIVE with operator confirmation, and mentions that campaigns are containers requiring separate creation of ad sets and ads via specific sibling tools (meta_ads_ad_sets_create, meta_ads_ads_create). It also references rollback_apply for reversibility.

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