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

The description adds 'Read-only' beyond the annotation, and lists specific fields shown (budget, optimization goal, status). This aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation and provides useful behavioral context without contradiction.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no extraneous information. Every word 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 absence of an output schema and minimal annotations, the description covers purpose and output contents but misses parameter details. It provides a decent baseline but is incomplete for full agent understanding.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate. It only implicitly hints at campaign_id via 'inside one campaign' and does not explain 'limit' (pagination) or 'meta_account_id' (account scope). This leaves significant ambiguity for the agent.

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 lists ad sets, with the scope 'across the account or inside one campaign.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_campaigns and list_ads, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 provides context on scope (account-wide vs. per campaign) but does not explicitly guide when not to use it or mention alternatives. For a tool with many siblings, more explicit guidance would improve usability.

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