Create a campaign (draft)

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It mentions the campaign starts as draft and defaults for success_metric window. But it omits side effects, idempotency, rate limits, and return behavior.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with purpose, and uses backticks for clarity. It's efficient but could be more organized.

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?

With 14 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. Missing parameter details, return value, and error conditions limit its usefulness.

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 coverage is 0%. Description explains three parameter groups (channels, audience, success_metric) out of 14. Many parameters like key, name, budget, creative are unmentioned, leaving gaps.

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 creates a campaign in draft status, matching the title. It differentiates from launch tools by mentioning the draft-to-launch workflow, but doesn't explicitly distinguish from all sibling tools like campaign_update.

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 explains the workflow: create draft, then preview, then launch. This helps when to use. However, it doesn't specify when NOT to use (e.g., immediate launch) or prerequisites like environment existence.

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