zuckerbot_upload_creative

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

With no annotations provided, the description shoulders the transparency burden. It explains that Meta upload and ad-creation jobs are queued asynchronously and polled until completion or timeout, which is important behavioral context beyond basic operation. It doesn't specify the return value or failure details, but it is far from opaque.

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?

Each sentence earns its place: purpose, async behavior, when-to-use, and explicit alternative routing. The distinction from other upload tools is front-loaded, making the description efficient and actionable without fluff.

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?

The description contains the necessary operational behavior (async queuing and polling), the eligibility constraint, and the alternative path. Since there is no output schema, a bit more detail about what the caller receives after polling would be ideal, but the tool is still callable correctly with the provided guidance.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters and nested fields well. The description adds minimal semantic depth beyond 'approved' campaign and image/video assets, which is sufficient given the schema's thoroughness.

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 the tool uploads finished creative assets (images or videos) to an approved intelligence campaign, with a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes this tool from zuckerbot_upload_ad_asset and zuckerbot_create_ad, making its role unmistakable among the large sibling list.

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 explicitly says to use this when you already have creative assets ready and limits scope to intelligence campaigns. It also names the alternative combination (zuckerbot_upload_ad_asset + zuckerbot_create_ad) for all other existing campaigns, giving clear routing guidance.

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