List campaigns.

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing on top of that: no pagination behavior, no note that results may be filtered by account, no indication of what happens with an empty result set.

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?

A single four-word sentence with no wasted words, but it is under-specified rather than concise: there is no front-loaded scope, no filtering summary, and nothing to orient the agent before it reads 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?

With 8 optional parameters, an enum status filter, a paginated result shape and no output schema, the description leaves the agent to infer everything about filtering and result handling. Annotations cover the safety profile, but the description is far too thin for a list tool with this much surface area.

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%, so the schema itself documents page/per_page defaults and the Status enum. Per the baseline rule for high coverage, 3 is the ceiling here since the description contributes zero parameter meaning of its own (e.g. it never clarifies the 'account' profile label or the opaque Sort/OrderBy/Search native query parameters).

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?

Tautological: description restates name/title.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives, and no exclusions. An agent cannot tell from the description whether this is the right tool versus any other listing endpoint, nor what the eight query parameters are for.

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