get_campaign_stats

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'Get full advertising statistics,' implying a read operation, but does not mention authentication requirements, rate limits, pagination, or what 'full' entails (e.g., metrics, aggregation level). The description is too vague for an agent to assess side effects or constraints.

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 with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the primary action and resource. While efficient, it could include more context without becoming overly verbose.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what 'full advertising statistics' includes (e.g., impressions, clicks, conversions) to set expectations. It also does not explain behavior for multiple campaigns (e.g., aggregated or per-campaign results). The tool's moderate complexity and array parameter warrant richer context.

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% for all three parameters, providing basic descriptions (e.g., 'Start date (YYYY-MM-DD)'). The description adds no further semantic detail beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 retrieves 'full advertising statistics' for campaigns over a date range, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from general statistics tools (e.g., get_statistics) by being campaign-specific, but does not explicitly differentiate from siblings that might also query campaign data.

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 get_statistics or list_campaigns. No context on prerequisites, when not to use it, or which scenarios it fits best. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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