unarchive_campaign

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only includes '[mutation]' to indicate a state change. It lacks details on side effects, permissions, prerequisites (e.g., campaign must be archived), or error conditions. The description does not sufficiently compensate for the absence of annotations.

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: a single line with the action and a brief explanation. It is front-loaded with 'Desarchivar campaña', making the purpose immediately clear. No redundant 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?

Given the low complexity (one required parameter, no output schema, no nesting), the description is minimally complete. It explains what the tool does adequately. It could mention that the campaign must be archived first, but the core functionality is conveyed.

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 has 100% coverage with a clear description for campaign_id. The tool description adds context ('Restores an archived campaign to the main list') but does not enhance understanding of the parameter beyond what the schema already provides. Baseline score of 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 tool's action: 'Desarchivar campaña' (unarchive campaign) and explains it restores an archived campaign to the main list. The verb is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like archive_campaign or delete_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 usage for restoring archived campaigns, providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or compare with alternatives like delete_campaign. The context is sufficient for a simple tool.

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