get_campaign

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable behavioral details: 'serving_issues' is normalized to a list, undocumented, only returned by by-id reads, and empty when no delivery issues. It also clarifies that campaigns have no parent, so no derived issues. This provides rich context beyond the annotation.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded: the primary purpose is stated in the first sentence. Every subsequent sentence adds necessary behavioral nuance without superfluous wording. No waste.

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 that an output schema exists, the description need not detail return values. It covers the key behavioral aspects (single fetch, field normalization) and addresses the undocumented serving_issues field. The parent clarification further reduces ambiguity. It is complete for a simple read tool.

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 zero description coverage for the sole parameter 'campaign_id'. The description adds only 'by id', which is minimal. It does not specify the expected format, constraints, or provide examples, leaving the agent with insufficient guidance for parameter usage.

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 'Fetch one campaign by id' with a specific verb and resource. While it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like get_ad or get_ad_group, the purpose is unambiguous and distinct given the resource name.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool over alternatives (e.g., using list endpoints or other get tools). The description implies usage for fetching a single campaign, but lacks contextual when-to-use or when-not-to-use advice.

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