mureo_state_upsert_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'atomically upsert', indicating atomicity, and 'root campaigns array', hinting at structure. However, it does not disclose return values, conflict resolution behavior, side effects, or permissions, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 sentences: first states what the tool does, second specifies usage context. It is front-loaded, efficient, and contains no superfluous information.

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?

The description covers purpose and usage but lacks details about return values, error handling, and validation. Given no output schema and nested parameters, the agent may need more information about the behavior of upsert (e.g., does it overwrite all fields or merge?). Referencing external docs helps but is not self-contained.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds little beyond the schema, simply mentioning the 'campaign' and 'path' parameters without extra semantic detail. The schema already describes required fields and optional fields, so no loss.

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 specifies the verb 'upsert', the resource 'CampaignSnapshot', and the location 'STATE.json (root campaigns array)'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like mureo_state_get, which reads state, and mureo_state_action_log_append, which logs actions.

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 states when to use: to sync STATE.json with campaign metadata changes from vendor MCPs or BYOD imports. This provides clear context, though it does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or mention alternatives.

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