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 carry the full burden. It mentions atomicity ('Atomically upsert') and explains the role of platform fields for the dashboard, but it does not disclose behaviors like concurrency handling, error consequences, or file access restrictions beyond a brief note in the path parameter.

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 two short paragraphs, front-loaded with the core action and usage context. Every sentence adds value, with no redundancy or unnecessary text.

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 the nested campaign object and its relation to the dashboard, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool effectively. However, it lacks details on return values (no output schema) and potential error conditions.

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 the description adding meaningful context beyond the schema. For example, it explains that platform+account_id populate the dashboard's platforms section and that omitting them renders the entry inactive. The metrics field is also well-described.

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 explicitly states 'Atomically upsert a CampaignSnapshot into STATE.json (root campaigns array)', clearly identifying the action and resource. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like mureo_state_get or mureo_state_action_log_append by focusing on campaign-specific state updates.

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 specifies the context: 'Use this to keep STATE.json in sync with campaign metadata changes... via vendor MCPs or BYOD imports.' This gives clear guidance on when to use, though it lacks explicit alternatives or 'when not to use' scenarios.

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