yd_campaigns_update

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Update campaign settings,' implying mutation but omits any details on side effects, required permissions, rate limits, or behavior when omitting optional fields.

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 a single concise sentence that immediately conveys the core action. However, it omits crucial details for a 7-parameter tool, so it is under-specified rather than optimally concise.

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 the tool has 7 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is far too brief. It does not explain the return behavior, optionality of fields, enum meanings, or how to use the client_login override. Significant gaps remain.

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 57%, so the description partly compensates by mentioning 'name, budget, strategy, status.' However, 'strategy' and 'status' are not in the schema, creating confusion. It adds some value but does not fully clarify the undocumented parameters (daily_budget_mode, negative_keywords).

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 tool updates campaign settings, listing example fields (name, budget, strategy, status). Among siblings, it is distinct from yd_campaigns_get/add/action and yd_campaign_strategy_update, which is a more specific strategy-only 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?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like yd_campaign_strategy_update, nor any context on prerequisites or exclusions. The usage is only implied.

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