ad_manager_google_get_segment_by_id

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, establishing this as a safe read operation. The description contributes no additional behavioral context beyond 'Get', which is consistent. No contradictions exist, but the description adds little value beyond what annotations already convey.

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 a single sentence with no redundant words. It is appropriately minimal for a simple get-by-id tool, and the content is front-loaded and direct.

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 the low complexity, complete parameter schema, and annotations covering safety, the description is minimally sufficient. It does not explain the distinction between custom and data segments, but the enum values are self-explanatory. It also doesn't mention the need for a Google Ads integration or what the response contains, but no output schema is provided. The description is adequate but could be slightly more informative.

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 100%, with all three parameters described, including the enum for 'type' and the default for 'locationId'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so it relies entirely on the schema for parameter understanding.

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 'Get segment by ID' clearly specifies the action (get), resource (segment), and method (by ID). This distinguishes it from listing tools like ad_manager_google_get_segments, though it doesn't elaborate on what a segment is in this context. The purpose is unambiguous and aligns with the tool name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that 'type' is required to differentiate custom vs. data segments, nor does it say to use this for retrieving a single segment rather than listing all. The agent must infer usage from the name and schema.

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