Create a QR campaign

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write, and the description adds meaningful context beyond that: the required qr:write permission, a plan-based quota on active campaigns, and the fact that the new campaign is returned. It doesn't say whether the campaign is created active or as a draft, nor what error surfaces when the free-plan limit is hit.

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?

Four short sentences, each carrying distinct information: purpose, follow-up sibling, return value, quota, and permission. Purpose is front-loaded and nothing is repeated from the schema.

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 two-parameter create tool with no output schema, the definition covers what it makes, what it returns, the permission needed, the plan restriction, and the natural next step. An agent has everything required to invoke it correctly in one shot.

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% and both parameters carry examples and constraints (https-only pattern, 120-char name limit), so the schema does the heavy lifting. The description only restates that scanners land on the destination URL, adding no syntax or format information beyond the schema — baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Create a trackable QR campaign') plus the mechanism ('sends scanners to a destination URL'), which an agent can distinguish from list_qr_campaigns, get_qr_campaign, and update_qr_campaign. It also pre-empts confusion with the closely related add_qr_code by naming it as the follow-up step.

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?

Explicitly routes the code-adding sub-task to add_qr_code and states a hard constraint ('Free plans allow one active campaign'), which is real usage guidance. It stops short of telling the agent when to reach for update_qr_campaign instead of creating a new one, so it doesn't hit full when/when-not coverage.

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