Get VWO draft campaign

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the description adds limited behavioral insight. It mentions 'full configuration,' which implies completeness, but doesn't disclose error conditions, auth needs, or rate limits. With annotations present, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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 sentence that is front-loaded and contains no extraneous words. Every part earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description should clarify return value structure. 'Full configuration' is vague. Given the number of sibling tools, the description is minimally sufficient but could be more specific about prerequisites or return contents.

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 tool description adds no parameter details beyond what the schema already provides, such as linking draftId to vwo_list_drafts. No extra semantics are offered.

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 retrieves the full configuration of a single draft campaign, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from related tools like vwo_list_drafts (lists) and vwo_get_campaign (live campaigns), though it could explicitly mention the draft vs. live distinction.

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 tool description provides no guidance on when to use or alternatives. The schema parameter draftId references vwo_list_drafts, but this is not in the description itself, leaving the agent without usage context.

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