resume_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only indicates mutation via the '[mutation]' tag and states the action, but gives no details about effects (e.g., whether the campaign starts immediately), idempotency, or error states.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a tag. It front-loads the action and precondition, with no unnecessary words. Every element earns its place.

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, the description does not explain what the tool returns (e.g., success confirmation or campaign state). It also lacks details on prerequisites (campaign must be paused) beyond implication, and no error conditions are mentioned. For a simple tool, more completeness would be helpful.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage, the schema already explains the single parameter (campaign_id). The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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 verb 'reanudar' (resume) and the resource 'campaña de marketing masivo' (mass marketing campaign), and includes the precondition 'que fue pausada' (that was paused), which distinguishes it from tools like start_campaign or archive_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 implies the tool should only be used on paused campaigns by stating 'fue pausada,' but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like pause_campaign, start_campaign, or cancel_campaign.

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