Get campaign

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It only states 'fetch metadata' implying read-only, but does not disclose any other behavioral traits (e.g., error behavior, response format, restrictions).

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?

Single sentence of 8 words, front-loaded with action and resource. No wasted words, but at the cost of omitting useful context. Appropriate for a simple tool but slightly too terse.

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 and no annotations, the description fails to explain what 'metadata' includes or what the return value looks like, leaving the agent with incomplete information for invocation.

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 0%. The description mentions 'by id' linking to the parameter, but does not add meaning beyond the schema's explicit 'campaign_id' field. Schema already defines integer with exclusiveMinimum:0.

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 uses specific verb 'fetch' and resource 'metadata for a single campaign by id', clearly distinguishing from sibling 'kanka_list_campaigns' which lists all campaigns.

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?

No explicit usage guidance, but the purpose and naming imply use when a single campaign ID is known. The presence of a sibling list tool provides implicit differentiation. Lacks when-not or alternatives.

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