ghl_ad_li_campaign_group_get

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

Description and annotations are consistent: readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds little beyond the annotations (e.g., endpoint details) but does not contradict them.

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?

Description is short and to the point, but the endpoint line is technical detail that might be better placed elsewhere. Still, it remains concise without unnecessary verbiage.

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?

For a simple retrieval tool with good annotations, the description covers the basic purpose and includes endpoint/scopes. No output schema means return format is not described, but the tool's simplicity mitigates this. Could mention error cases or required permissions beyond OAuth scopes.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all 3 parameters. The description adds no additional meaning about parameters, so 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?

Title and description clearly state the tool retrieves a LinkedIn ad campaign group by ID. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like ghl_ad_li_campaign_group_upsert or ghl_ad_li_campaign_group_publish, missing an opportunity to clarify when to use this read-only variant.

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 when you have an ad ID and want details, but offers no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like listing or reporting tools. No when-not statements or error scenarios are provided.

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