Create a VWO campaign

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

The description discloses that the tool creates real state affecting live traffic, which adds behavioral context beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). This warning is crucial for safe usage.

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, concise and front-loaded with the purpose and key behavioral note. No wasted words.

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 the tool has 7 parameters (4 required) and no output schema, the description covers the essential behavioral impact and usage guidance. It could mention response or error handling, but overall it is sufficiently 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the importance of confirming type, URLs, and goals, but adds little new meaning beyond what the schema already provides for each parameter.

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 that the tool creates a new campaign (experiment) in VWO, which is a specific verb+resource. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like vwo_update_campaign or vwo_new_campaign_goal, though the use of 'new' makes the purpose clear.

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 advises confirming type, URLs, and goals with the user before calling, providing clear context for when to use. It implies caution due to live traffic impact, but does not mention alternatives or when not to use explicitly.

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