start_campaign

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

Without annotations, the description discloses that this is a mutation and requires a confirm flag for execution, labeling it a 'peligrosa' (dangerous) action. This provides sufficient behavioral transparency for an AI agent.

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 very concise, consisting of two short sentences that front-load the action and conditions. Every part is necessary and adds value.

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 the simplicity of the tool (2 params, no output schema), the description covers the key aspects: what it does, when it can be used (draft/scheduled campaigns), and the confirmation requirement. It is mostly complete, though could mention expected outcome or errors.

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 input schema already provides full description coverage for both parameters. The description adds context that confirm is needed for a dangerous action, which is helpful but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: to initiate a marketing campaign by sending mass emails. It specifies it works with campaigns in draft or scheduled status, distinguishing it from sibling tools like cancel_campaign or pause_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 specifies that the tool works with campaigns in 'borrador' (draft) or 'programadas' (scheduled) status, implying it should not be used for already running campaigns. It also notes the need for confirmation, but does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use.

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