ghl_ad_li_campaign_group_publish

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) indicate it's a mutation but not destructive. Description adds endpoint and OAuth scopes, but does not disclose behavior such as making the campaign active, potential side effects, or reversibility. Adequate but not detailed.

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?

Relatively concise with three lines: redundant title-like line, a more specific action line, and technical details. Could be improved by removing the first line, but overall efficient.

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?

Covers the action, endpoint, and auth scopes. Lacks information about preconditions (e.g., campaign status), return values (no output schema), and relationship to siblings (e.g., need to upsert first). Minimally complete for a publish operation.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for both parameters (adId and body). The description does not add extra semantics beyond what the schema provides, earning the baseline score.

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 'Publish' and the resource 'LinkedIn ad campaign group', with additional context 'push it live'. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get, upsert, or delete.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites (e.g., campaign must exist and be in draft state) or when not to use it. Relies solely on the tool's name for context.

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