adgroups_find_org_wide

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

No annotations provided, and the description lacks behavioral details such as whether it reads data, requires special permissions, or handles pagination. It only states what it does, not how it behaves.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence that is concise and to the point. Could include more context, but it is not verbose.

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 complexity (nested objects, pagination, optional orgId) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. Missing return format, pagination behavior, and authorization hints.

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 descriptions for both parameters (selector and orgId). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 clearly states it finds ad groups across the entire org using a selector. The verb 'find' and resource 'ad groups' are specific, and the scope 'across the entire org' distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'adgroups_find_in_campaign'.

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?

Implied usage is for org-wide queries, contrasting with campaign-scoped tools. However, no explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives are mentioned. The scope is clear from the name and description.

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