wb_advert_minus_phrases

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It does disclose the read/write mode switch and the absence of plus-phrases, but it doesn't state whether setting replaces or merges existing phrases, what the read response looks like, or any permission/rate-limit considerations.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and core operation. The note about no plus-phrases is concise domain context rather than padding.

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?

For a tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic read/set modes but leaves the read response shape and the mutation semantics of norm_queries implicit. The optional nm_id parameter is essentially unexplained, so the description is adequate but not fully self-sufficient.

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 67%, and the description adds useful context by identifying 'Campaign' as the advert context and reinforcing norm_queries as the read/write switch. However, nm_id remains vaguely described as 'offer_id', and the exact semantics of norm_queries values are not elaborated beyond the schema.

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 the specific resource, 'Campaign minus-phrases', and states both operations: read without norm_queries and set with them. This gives a clear verb + resource pairing and distinguishes the tool from the many other wb_advert_* siblings.

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 explicitly tells agents when to read (omit norm_queries) and when to set (include norm_queries). It doesn't name an alternative tool, but the note that WB has no plus-phrases since 2026 preempts a search for a plus-phrase counterpart.

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