zuckerbot_create_ad

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

With no annotations present, the description fully compensates. It discloses dry-run-by-default behavior, the need for `execute: true` plus an idempotency key, that ads are always created PAUSED, that `image_url` assets are uploaded automatically, and that VIDEO assets must be processed/ready before use.

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 dense and front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence carries necessary information. It is longer than ideal due to overlapping asset and destination rules, but the structure remains readable and each clause earns its place.

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 high complexity, 17 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers the essential operational context: dry-run flow, execution requirements, pause-by-default, asset input paths, destination exclusivity, and cloning alternative. An agent has enough context to select and invoke the tool 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?

Although schema coverage is 100%, the description adds meaningful constraints beyond the schema: exactly one of `final_url` or `lead_form_id`, VIDEO ads require a `cta`, VIDEO + `final_url` requires `cta`, and `image_hash` comes from `zuckerbot_upload_ad_asset`. This converts a flat parameter list into usable decision rules.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create ONE new ad' in an 'EXISTING ad set,' and explicitly distinguishes itself from cloning via `zuckerbot_duplicate_ad`. It clearly establishes what this tool is for versus other campaign/ad-creation tools.

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?

It tells the agent precisely when to use this tool: adding a brand-new image or video into an already-running campaign, including externally-created campaigns. It also provides an explicit exclusion: if the goal is to clone an existing ad, use `zuckerbot_duplicate_ad` instead.

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