export_campaign_csv

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the allowed campaign statuses and that it downloads logs as CSV. It does not mention side effects, error handling, auth requirements, or rate limits. For a read operation, this is adequate but minimal.

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 concise with two sentences, front-loading the purpose. The inclusion of '[query]' at the end is slightly odd but doesn't detract significantly.

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 one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the action (export to CSV) and the status constraint. It does not describe the output format in detail or mention size limits, but it is sufficient for a simple export tool.

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?

The single parameter campaign_id has a clear schema description. The tool description adds context that the campaign must be in an allowed status, which goes beyond the schema and helps with correct usage.

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 verb 'exportar' (export) and resource 'resultados de campana a CSV', specifying it downloads send logs of completed campaigns. It lists allowed statuses (completed, cancelled, paused, archived), which distinguishes it from sibling campaign tools like get_campaign_logs or start_campaign.

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 explicitly states that it only works with campaigns in specific statuses (completadas, canceladas, pausadas, archivadas), providing clear context on when to use it. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it beyond status constraints.

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