get_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 states what the tool returns but does not explicitly disclose whether it is a read-only operation, authentication requirements, or error behavior. The read-only nature is implied by 'Get', but not guaranteed.

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 a single, efficient sentence of 12 words that immediately conveys the purpose. No extraneous 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?

No output schema is provided; the description gives some insight into return contents ('state, targeting, and experiences') but lacks full structure. However, for a simple read tool, it is reasonably complete.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description adds 'state, targeting, and experiences' which hints at returned details but does not clarify parameter meanings beyond the 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's verb 'Get', resource 'a single Interaction Studio campaign', and specifics 'including state, targeting, and experiences'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'list_campaigns' (list vs single) and 'get_campaign_stats' (different details).

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 implies the tool is for fetching details of a specific campaign, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like 'get_campaign_context' or 'get_campaign_stats', nor does it mention when not to use it.

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