get_campaign_network_settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It adds value by defining 'network' and documenting that a campaign with no saved settings returns an empty array. But it doesn't cover error behavior, authorization needs, or other side effects.

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 first two sentences are essentially identical ('Get the networks... Returns the networks...'), wasting words. A single sentence would have sufficed, making this less concise than it should be.

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 explains the network concept and the empty-array case, which is useful given no output schema. However, it doesn't describe the structure of the networks array or any edge cases, leaving some gaps for a tool with five parameters.

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 parameters are already described. The description adds no parameter-level details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 gets the networks a Sponsored Products campaign targets, with a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like save_campaign_network_settings and other getters.

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?

Usage is implied: it's the read operation for campaign network settings. However, no explicit guidance is given about when to use this versus alternatives, and no exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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