change_campaign_status

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

No annotations provided, so description fully carries the burden. Discloses batch processing behavior, per-campaign result handling, detailed error responses for API failures and validation errors, and rate limits. The constraint 'Only campaigns created via the API can have their status changed' is an important behavioral trait.

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?

Description is well-organized with clear sections, bullet points, and structured examples. Every sentence adds necessary information; no redundancy or filler. The format is easy to parse quickly.

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?

For a tool with multiple action types, state constraints, rate limits, and a returned output schema, the description covers all relevant aspects. Success and error responses are fully documented. No gaps are apparent.

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 0%, but description fully compensates by explaining the action enum values with their validity contexts and specifying the campaign_ids range (1-10). This adds meaning well beyond the bare schema property definitions.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Change the lifecycle state' and specifies the resource (campaigns) with a batch size constraint (1-10). Actions STOP, PAUSE, RESUME are precisely defined. Easily distinguished from siblings like create_campaign or update_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?

Provides detailed conditions for each action (e.g., STOP only for ONE_TIME campaigns in SCHEDULED state, PAUSE/RESUME for specific delivery types). Includes rate limits and the constraint that only API-created campaigns are eligible. Lacks explicit mention of when not to use the tool, but the guidance is comprehensive and clear.

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