zuckerbot_upload_creative

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

Discloses key behavioral traits: 'queues the Meta upload and ad-creation jobs asynchronously, then polls until they complete or the polling window expires.' This goes beyond the bare minimum. Since annotations are absent, the description carries the full burden, and it adequately covers the asynchronous nature and polling mechanism.

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?

Two sentences that front-load the purpose and follow with behavioral detail. Every word earns its place; no fluff or repetition.

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?

Despite the tool's moderate complexity (5 parameters, async behavior), the description lacks an explanation of the return value or output format. There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what the agent receives after polling completes (e.g., success confirmation, creative IDs). This gap reduces completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, with all 5 parameters already described in the input schema. The tool description adds no additional meaning or context for the parameters beyond what the schema provides. The baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the verb 'Upload' and resource 'finished creative assets (images or videos)' to a specific target 'approved intelligence campaign'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like zuckerbot_get_creative_status (status check) and zuckerbot_tag_creative (tagging), as no sibling handles uploading creatives.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this when you have your own creative assets ready.' This provides clear context for when to invoke the tool. However, it does not mention when not to use it or suggest alternative tools (e.g., if assets are not ready), which would elevate the score to 5.

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