ads_update_ad

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the core update action but omits important behavioral details such as the confirm parameter (default false), potential side effects of swapping creative, permission requirements, or reversibility. The presence of a confirm flag in the schema is not addressed, leaving a significant transparency gap.

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, front-loaded sentence that conveys the essential action without unnecessary words. It is appropriately concise and every word adds value, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 mutation tool with 5 parameters, no annotations, and no output schema, the description is too sparse. It covers the main fields but omits critical context such as the need for confirmation, interaction with pause/activate sibling tools, and the required ad_id. The overall picture is incomplete for an agent to invoke this tool correctly without additional assumptions.

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 compensate. It lists name, status, and creative, which maps to name, status, and creative_id parameters, but it does not mention the required ad_id, the confirm parameter, or clarify status values. The confirm parameter is completely absent from the description, and the meaning of 'swap its creative' is not explained technically.

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 clearly states the tool updates an ad's name, status, or creative, using a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like ads_update_campaign or ads_update_adset, and the mention of 'swap its creative' adds a unique, concrete action.

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?

The description implies when to use this tool: when updating an ad's name, status, or creative. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives like ads_pause_ad or ads_activate_ad for status changes, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites. Clear context but no explicit alternative guidance.

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