delete_campaign

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses the key constraint on campaign status (only draft) but does not describe side effects, irreversibility, or error handling. Basic behavioral traits are covered, but more detail would be beneficial.

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 concise sentences with the main action front-loaded. Every word is necessary and no fluff exists.

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 no output schema, the description should explain return values or error conditions. It does not specify what happens on success or failure (e.g., error if campaign is sent). The constraint is covered, but completeness suffers from lack of return info.

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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no parameter-specific information beyond what the schema already provides (apiKey and campaignId). No additional value is given.

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?

Clearly states the tool deletes draft campaigns and explicitly distinguishes that sent campaigns cannot be deleted, only archived. The verb 'delete' and resource 'draft campaign' are specific and unambiguous.

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?

Directly tells when to use (draft campaigns) and when not to (sent campaigns, which must be archived). However, it does not name the alternative tool for archiving, which is not present in the sibling list, slightly reducing guidance completeness.

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