Mark a campaign as completed

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

No annotations are provided, placing full responsibility on the description. It discloses that the state transition is terminal (only archive follows), but lacks details on reversibility, side effects, or permissions. For a state-changing tool, this is insufficient.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action, no superfluous words. The structure is efficient and easy to parse.

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?

While the description clarifies the tool's purpose and lifecycle, it omits details about the reason parameter, output, error conditions, or integration with sibling tools. Given no output schema and low parameter coverage, the description is not fully complete for an agent to invoke correctly without additional context.

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%, yet the description adds no information about the two parameters (id and reason). It does not explain their purpose, constraints, or usage beyond what the schema provides, which is minimal.

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 action ('Move a scheduled / running / paused campaign') and the target state ('to `completed`'), specifying applicable statuses, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like campaign_pause, campaign_resume, and campaign_archive.

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 'Terminal — only `archive` follows', which indicates the lifecycle placement and implies when this tool is appropriate. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., if already completed) or compare to alternatives.

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