meta_ads_campaigns_update

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Mentions it is mutating and reversible via rollback_apply, which adds behavioral context. However, lacks details on permissions, rate limits, or side effects of specific field updates (e.g., deleting/archiving).

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?

Three concise sentences with no fluff. Front-loaded with purpose and key behavior. Every sentence adds distinct value.

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?

Covers function, partial update, return value, reversibility, and alternatives. No output schema, but description states returned campaign. Lacks details on validation or immediate effects of updates, but sufficient for most use cases.

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 covers 100% of parameters, so description need not repeat basics. Adds value by explaining partial update semantic, constraint on daily_budget (CBO only), and cross-reference to ad_set tool. Enhances beyond schema.

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?

Description clearly states it updates an existing campaign, specifies partial update behavior, and returns the updated campaign. It distinguishes from sibling tools for status transitions, making 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?

Explicitly recommends using pause/enable tools for status-only transitions with reasoning (safer, explicit intent). Provides clear guidance on when to use alternatives, though does not cover exclusions like creating campaigns.

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