list_spa_campaigns

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosure. It mentions pagination (offset/limit required), optional status filter with values ACTIVE/PAUSED, and that it returns a paginated list. However, it does not describe auth requirements (x_token, x_retailer_id) or any default/maximum page size behavior, which are partly in the schema but not in the description.

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 three sentences long, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and contains no fluff. Each sentence adds functional detail: pagination, status filter, and required parameters.

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 no output schema, the description mentions the return type (paginated list) but not its detailed structure. It covers the main functional aspects of pagination and filtering. However, it does not mention the authentication headers (x_token, x_retailer_id) which are essential for making the call, though they are described in the schema. Overall, it is reasonably complete for a list operation.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by specifying the exact status filter values (ACTIVE, PAUSED), which the schema only describes generically. It also reinforces the role of offset and limit for pagination, though this is already somewhat inferable from 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 lists all SPA campaigns for an advertiser, with specific mention of pagination and optional status filtering. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_spa_campaign_by_id (single campaign) and create_spa_campaign (creation).

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 listing all campaigns for an advertiser, which is distinct from fetching a single campaign or creating one. It does not explicitly discuss when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it appropriately.

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