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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true; description does not contradict them but adds no detail about side effects such as overwrite behavior or required setup.

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?

One short, front-loaded sentence with no redundant wording; ideal brevity.

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 complex creation call with a nested request object and many optional fields, the description omits required-field context, output expectations, and behavior after creation; sibling-tool context only partially compensates.

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 has zero description coverage and the description adds no parameter explanations; only names, types, enums, and defaults provide weak inference for fields like campaign_params, ad_params, and partnership IDs.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Create' and resource 'saved launch template', clearly distinguishing from sibling tools like templates_update, templates_delete, and templates_list.

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?

No guidance about when to use this tool versus templates_update or templates_reverse_engineer; no mention of creating new vs overwriting existing templates.

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