mureo_state_upsert_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'Atomically upsert', implying transactional behavior, but lacks details on conflict resolution, error handling, permissions, or side effects. The description is minimally 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?

Two sentences, no redundancy. First sentence defines core action, second provides usage context. Efficient 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?

Given the complexity of an upsert operation with nested objects and the absence of an output schema or annotations, the description lacks details on update vs insert behavior, permission requirements, and concurrency. The tool's behavior is under-specified.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds reference to external docs for optional fields, but the schema already describes parameters adequately. Minimal added value 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?

The description clearly states the tool upserts a CampaignSnapshot into STATE.json. It specifies the resource ('CampaignSnapshot into STATE.json') and the verb ('upsert'), and distinguishes from sibling state tools like mureo_state_get by focusing on writing state.

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 advises using this tool to sync STATE.json with campaign metadata changes from vendor MCPs or BYOD imports, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives, though no direct alternative exists among siblings.

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