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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds that REMOVED is irreversible, deletes the ad and its history, recommends pausing first if unsure, and explains the 3-enabled-RSA limit that makes removal necessary. This is substantial operational context beyond structured annotations.

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?

Front-loads the core action and status values, then adds alternatives and dry-run behavior. Each sentence carries distinct operational value, including the RSA limit rationale, so the length is justified.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. Annotations and description together cover destructive behavior, irreversibility, idempotency implications, dry-run, alternatives, and the cleanup rationale. An agent has enough to call this correctly.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It fully documents status values and confirm=false dry-run semantics, but leaves customer_id, ad_group_id, and ad_id as implicit identifiers with no format or source guidance.

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 the exact operation: set a Google Ads ad status to ENABLED, PAUSED, or REMOVED. It distinguishes itself from siblings by naming update_ad_group_status and update_campaign_status, so an agent can identify its scope without opening the schema.

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?

Explicitly explains when to enable a paused ad, when to pause/resume, and when to remove dead paused ads during iteration. It routes ad group and campaign changes to the named alternative tools and documents confirm=false dry-run behavior.

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