[Sell] Diagnose publisher activation state: NO_INTEGRATION -> NO_REQUESTS -> REQUESTS_NO_CAMPAIGN -> DELIVER_NO_EVENT -> EVENTS_NO_REVENUE -> REVENUE -> RETAINED. Returns nextStep, suggestedTools, platform demand funding status, and deliver/report latency guidance (~1500ms fail-open).
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
The description discloses the return fields, the state transitions, and importantly the latency and fail-open behavior ('~1500ms fail-open'), which is critical for an agent deciding to call the tool. Since no annotations exist, this transparency is valuable.
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 delivers all necessary information: the tool's purpose, the state machine, and the response contents. No fluff.
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 no output schema, the description adequately enumerates the return fields (nextStep, suggestedTools, platform demand funding status, latency guidance) and the state model, making the tool's behavior sufficiently clear for invocation.
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?
The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is complete. The description adds meaningful context about what the tool returns rather than parameter specifics, but with zero parameters there is nothing to explain.
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 uses the specific verb 'Diagnose' with a clear resource 'publisher activation state' and enumerates the full state progression, distinguishing it from report tools like get_publisher_report which return analytics, not activation diagnostics.
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?
It provides context by labeling the tool '[Sell]' and explaining the state chain, implying it should be used when a publisher's activation status needs to be assessed. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternative tools, unlike get_calls which mentions search_calls_extensive.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.
Multiple tools have overlapping or misleading purposes: buy_campaign and buy_placement are aliases of create_campaign, list_placement actually creates a placement, and get_attribution/get_campaign both provide campaign stats. The report_* tools are distinct but similarly named, increasing selection risk.
Most tools follow a verb_noun snake_case pattern, but there are notable deviations: buy_campaign/buy_placement use 'buy' instead of 'create', list_placement is a creator not a lister, and simple nouns like 'wallet' and 'whoami' break the convention.
At 31 tools, the server feels heavy. Several tools are redundant aliases (buy_campaign, buy_placement) or could be consolidated (multiple report_* and list_* variants), making the surface unnecessarily large for the ad marketplace domain.
The core lifecycle is covered: campaign/placement creation, delivery, reporting, attribution, refunds, and cashouts. However, there are gaps like no update_campaign, no true list_placements, and no get_placement, leaving some workflows incomplete.
