duplicate_campaign

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=false and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds 'Creates a new record' and 'Not idempotent', which reinforces but does not significantly extend beyond the annotations. No contradictions.

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 very concise with three short lines. However, the first line includes emojis and HTTP method info which may be considered clutter. It is efficient overall.

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 simplicity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema) and the presence of annotations, the description is minimally complete. It explains the action and the non-idempotent nature, but it does not explicitly mention that it copies an existing campaign or what the return value might be.

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 for the single parameter 'id', described as 'id of the source campaign'. The description adds no additional information about parameters beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it duplicates a campaign and creates a new record. The verb 'duplicate' and resource 'Campaign' are visible. However, it does not explicitly say that it copies from an existing campaign, which would differentiate it from create_campaign.

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 includes a warning about non-idempotence, which is useful. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to create_campaign or edit_campaign. The context from sibling tools is not leveraged.

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