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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false. The description adds meaningful context beyond those: it may upload media to Meta, and the swap is not applied until a separate confirmation step, which is important for an agent deciding whether to call it.

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 three short clauses and is front-loaded with the core action. Every clause carries useful information, though the telegraphic style leaves some terms ('page swap') underspecified.

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 8 parameters, 0% schema description coverage, and a prepare-style mutation that may upload media, the description is too thin. The output schema and annotations carry some burden, but the agent still lacks basic guidance on which page-related parameters to supply and what the preparation produces.

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 schema has 8 parameters with 0% description coverage, and the description mentions none of them. It does not explain the differences between ad_id, ad_account_id, account_id, page_id, page_ids, new_page_id, facebook_page_id, or ad_name, so the agent receives no semantic guidance for a highly ambiguous parameter set.

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 states a specific verb ('Prepare') and resource ('page swap'), and indicates it is a preparatory step rather than the final application. It distinguishes itself from the confirm sibling by saying 'Confirm separately to apply', though it never explicitly names the ad object being changed.

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?

There is a clear workflow hint: prepare now, confirm separately to apply. However, it does not name the alternative tool (ads_replace_page_confirm), state when to use this versus ads_replace_creative_prepare, or describe prerequisites such as required page permissions.

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