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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that this is a search operation and that it returns IDs, which is useful context. However, it does not mention result format, pagination, error behavior, or clarify whether the operation is strictly read-only beyond what 'Search' implies.

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 two short sentences with no filler. The key action is front-loaded, and the second sentence adds the practical purpose of the returned IDs. Every word 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?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and four parameters, the description is too thin to fully guide invocation. It omits the meaning of ad_account_id, does not distinguish this search from related targeting searches, and gives no sense of what the response contains beyond IDs.

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 description coverage is only 25%, so the description should compensate for undocumented parameters. It mentions keyword/category, which maps to query and category, but ad_account_id and limit are left unexplained beyond the schema's structural constraints. The description adds little over the schema for the query parameter and nothing for the other parameters.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Search Meta behavior targeting by keyword/category' and explains the result ('Returns IDs for use in targeting.behaviors'). It is distinct enough from siblings like adsap_search_interests because it names behavior targeting, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from those alternatives.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling search tools such as adsap_search_interests or adsap_search_geo_locations. The description implies the tool is for looking up behavior targeting IDs, but it offers no exclusions, prerequisites, or alternative routing.

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