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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so the 'Read-only' prefix is redundant. The description adds value beyond annotations by naming the returned fields (id, nome, stato, campagna) and the status enum values (ENABLED|PAUSED|ARCHIVED), though it omits pagination or rate-limit behavior.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the read-only nature and the resource, then lists return fields and the filter. No words are wasted and the structure is easy to scan.

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 list tool with annotations covering safety and no output schema, the description does reasonably well by naming returned fields. However, it leaves profile_id undocumented and gives no pagination or filtering syntax details, so it is only minimally complete given the schema gap.

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 33%, so the description must compensate. It mentions campaign_id_filter only by name without explaining its format (array of strings) and never addresses profile_id, leaving two of three parameters with no real semantic detail beyond the schema's bare types.

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?

States a specific verb (elenco = list) and resource (ad group Sponsored Brands SB), and lists returned fields. It implicitly distinguishes itself from siblings like ads_list_sp_ad_groups and ads_list_sd_ad_groups via the 'SB' qualifier, so an agent can tell it apart without opening schemas.

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 only usage guidance is 'Filtra con campaign_id_filter' (filter with campaign_id_filter), which tells how to narrow results but not when to choose this tool over the SP/SD ad group list tools. No explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions are given.

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