Campaigns

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, and openWorld, so safety is covered. The description adds mode-dependent output context (landings/promotion pages linked from home page vs carousels with a few products and links), which is useful beyond the annotations, though it does not mention rate limits or pagination.

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 purpose is front-loaded in the first line, followed by two tightly scoped bullets for each mode and a single routing sentence. Every sentence earns its place with no filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return-value detail is not required, and both params are schema-covered. The description covers both invocation modes and the sibling hand-off, leaving only minor gaps such as pagination or limits for large campaign lists.

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 both parameters (code, products_per_section) are already fully documented in the schema. The description's mode split largely restates what the schema says about omitting 'code', so it adds little beyond the baseline.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List current campaigns, or show one campaign's sections and products') and splits the tool into two clear modes keyed on the presence of 'code'. It distinguishes itself from tl_category_products by routing product listing there, though it does not explicitly differentiate from nearby siblings like tl_deals or tl_categories.

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?

It states explicitly when to use each mode ('Without code' vs 'With code') and names the alternative tool (tl_category_products) with the condition that selects it, including a caveat that products_in_carousel counts only the carousel, not the page. Nothing about selection is left to inference.

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