targeting_keywords_update

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It says 'bulk-update' but does not explain whether the update is partial or full replacement, what happens to omitted fields, error handling, or authorization needs. The schema indicates up to 1000 items but this is not mentioned in the description.

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 and to the point. It could include a bit more detail without becoming verbose, but overall it is appropriately concise.

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 tool's complexity (4 parameters, nested objects, no output schema, no annotations), the description is insufficient. It lacks details on return values, error scenarios, or the update behavior (e.g., whether fields are merged or replaced). This makes it hard for an agent to use correctly.

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 only 25%, yet the description adds only that 'Each entry must include id' and lists the editable fields. It does not explain the structure of 'bidAmount' or the meaning of enums like 'matchType'. The description fails to compensate for low schema coverage.

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 includes a specific verb ('bulk-update'), identifies the resource ('targeting keywords'), and lists the updatable fields (status, bid, text, matchType). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like create or delete.

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 states that each entry must include 'id', implying that updates are for existing keywords. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites like having the campaign and ad group IDs (though they are in the schema).

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