Get ad group

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description does add genuinely useful semantics beyond that by framing bid_too_low as a hint rather than a delivery block, preventing a misread of the result. It says nothing about not-found behavior or how serving issues are represented when there are none.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no filler, and the bid_too_low caveat is a high-value detail. However, it is a sentence fragment that front-loads return content instead of the operation, so the agent reads the payload description before learning what the tool does.

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?

This is a simple single-parameter read tool with no output schema, so the bar is low, and the annotations cover safety. Still, the description never confirms it returns one ad group by ID, whether missing IDs error or return empty, or what the serving-issues structure looks like, which matters since no output schema exists.

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?

There is a single parameter with full schema description coverage ("Ad group id"), so the schema already carries the meaning. The description adds no format, sourcing, or constraint detail beyond it, which matches the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

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?

"One ad group with serving issues and bid_too_low" implies a single-resource fetch, but the description never states the verb (get/retrieve) or that lookup is by the ad_group_id parameter. It is distinguishable from list_ad_groups only by the word "One," and the rest of the sentence describes return payload rather than the tool's 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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no alternative is named despite sibling tools like list_ad_groups or get_ad. The agent must infer the use case from the tool name and schema alone.

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