meta_ads_campaigns_enable

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the action on campaign status, the non-recursive side effect on nested entities, the return value (campaign id and new status), and reversibility via rollback_apply or meta_ads_campaigns_pause. No contradiction with annotations (none present).

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 and front-loaded with the core action. Each of the four sentences adds distinct value: main purpose, child-status caveat, return value, and reversibility. No unnecessary words.

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?

Despite the tool's apparent simplicity, the description covers all essential behavioral nuances: what is changed, what is not changed, what is returned, and how to reverse. The mention of related sibling tools makes the description contextually complete for an agent to act correctly.

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% for both parameters (account_id and campaign_id). The description adds no extra parameter-specific meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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's specific verb 'resumes' and resource 'paused campaign' and sets status to ACTIVE. It distinguishes from sibling tools like meta_ads_campaigns_pause and the ad-set/ads enable tools by noting the campaign-only scope.

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?

Provides explicit when-to-use (to resume a paused campaign) and when-not-to-use (when child ad sets/ads are paused, they won't auto-resume) with named alternatives (meta_ads_ad_sets_enable / meta_ads_ads_enable). This gives clear context and exclusions.

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