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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so 'Read-only' merely repeats structured data. It does add a useful nuance by framing defaultBid as the SD optimization lever, but says nothing about pagination, result limits, or auth requirements beyond the account_id hint in the schema.

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 dense sentence that front-loads the read-only nature and resource before the field list and filter hint. No padding, though the mixed Italian/English phrasing slightly hurts scannability.

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 read-only list tool with no output schema, enumerating returned fields is helpful, but the under-documented parameters (75% undocumented) and absent pagination/volume guidance leave gaps an agent must guess at.

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 only 25% and three of four parameters (profile_id, state_filter, campaign_id_filter) have no schema description. The description names campaign_id_filter but gives no value format or behavior, and ignores state_filter and profile_id entirely, so it does not compensate for the coverage gap.

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?

Clear verb (list/read) plus specific resource (Sponsored Display ad groups), with the returned fields enumerated (id, nome, stato, campagna, defaultBid). An agent can distinguish it from ads_list_sp_ad_groups and ads_list_sb_ad_groups purely from the name and description.

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 sentence 'Filtra con campaign_id_filter' implies the filtering use case but never states when to use this tool versus the SP/SB ad-group siblings or when not to. Usage is inferable rather than explicit.

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