campaign_negative_keywords_delete

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the action (delete) without mentioning implications like irreversibility, required permissions, rate limits, or impact on campaigns. 'Bulk-delete' hints at multiple deletions but adds no further context.

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 that is front-loaded with the essential action. It is concise and avoids fluff, though it might be too brief given the complexity of the operation. Still, it earns points for efficiency.

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 (delete operation, 3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error messages, or the effect on related data. The agent lacks information to assess success or handle failures.

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 coverage is low (33%, only orgId has a description). The description says 'by ID,' which loosely refers to keywordIds but does not explain the role of campaignId or how keywordIds are used. It fails to compensate for the lack of parameter descriptions in the schema, especially for campaignId and keywordIds.

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 'Bulk-delete campaign-level negative keywords by ID,' which specifies the verb (delete), resource (campaign-level negative keywords), and method (by ID). It distinguishes from sibling tools like adgroup_negative_keywords_delete or targeting_keywords_delete_single by explicitly mentioning 'campaign-level'.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as campaign_negative_keywords_find or campaign_negative_keywords_update. The description lacks context about prerequisites, workflow, or when not to use it (e.g., if using adgroup-level deletion).

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