get_ads_campaigns

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

Annotations already declare read-only, idempotent and non-destructive, so the bar is lower. The description still adds real context beyond them: the fixed 28-day aggregation window, that spend is denominated in the account currency, and the connected=false sentinel for an unconnected Apple Ads account.

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?

Front-loaded with the resource and scope in the first clause; the parenthetical is informative rather than filler, and the currency and connected=false notes are terse trailing sentences. Slightly dense, but each clause carries new information.

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 no output schema, the description must describe the payload itself, and it does: per-campaign metrics, totals, top keywords and search terms, the time window, the currency unit, and the disconnected-account case. Nothing an agent needs to call it correctly is missing.

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% (appId: 'app id from list_apps'), so baseline is 3. The description goes further by warning that matching is by App Store id rather than app name, which prevents a plausible misuse of the single parameter.

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?

States a specific verb and resource (Apple Ads campaigns for one app), enumerates the returned metrics (spend, impressions, taps, installs, budget, serving status, totals, top keywords/search terms), and pins the 28-day window. It also distinguishes itself from siblings like get_ads_keywords and get_ads_search_terms by clarifying those are included here only as top-N by spend.

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?

It gives a clear condition for invocation (campaign performance for one app over the last 28 days) and a concrete parameter rule: match by App Store id, not by name. It stops short of naming when to prefer a sibling tool or what to do when connected=false appears beyond reporting the state.

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