Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• list_ad_groupsC
  2.9/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Lacks disclosure of auth needs, rate limits, data freshness, pagination, ordering, or other behavioral traits. Very minimal.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness4/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence of 14 words, no fluff. Could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness, but current length is acceptable.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness2/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Despite having an output schema, the description omits key context like required parameters (both optional?), behavior when filters absent, and return value summary. Incomplete for a simple list tool.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters2/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema has 0% description coverage; parameter titles repeat names. Description adds only that campaign_id is optional, but does not explain semantics, types, or constraints. Minimal value beyond schema.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Description clearly states verb (List), resource (ad groups), and scope (for an ad account, optional filter by campaign_id). Distinguishes from sibling tools list_ads, list_campaigns, etc.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. Does not mention prerequisites, scenarios, or when to avoid. Only implies usage by stating the basic function.

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

• get_daily_performanceB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the default window (7 days) and lists returned metrics, but does not state whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or has rate limits. The lack of transparency about side effects or data freshness is a gap.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single sentence that packs essential information: timeframe, metrics, and grouping dimensions. No superfluous words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The tool has few parameters and an output schema, so the description could suffice. However, it does not address edge cases (e.g., empty data) or provide context on how metrics are calculated. The output schema likely documents return values, but the description could still be more complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description covers the 'days' parameter by indicating it sets the 'last N days' window with a default of 7. However, the 'account_id' parameter is not explained at all; the description does not clarify its role or optionality. Given 0% schema coverage, the description partially compensates but remains incomplete.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool returns daily performance metrics (impressions, clicks, spend, etc.) grouped by date and campaign ID, with a configurable lookback window. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tool 'get_performance_report', which might serve a similar purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention scenarios where it should not be used. For example, it does not explain how it differs from 'get_performance_report' or when to use 'list_campaigns' instead.

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

• get_performance_reportB
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It does not mention read-only nature, required permissions, error handling, or response format. Only defaults are described.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is very concise, with two sentences covering purpose, date format, and defaults. No unnecessary information.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the output schema exists and there are 5 parameters, the description covers defaults but omits explanation for optional parameter 'account_id' and does not differentiate from sibling tools. It is partially complete.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description adds meaning by listing default values for 'fields' and 'breakdowns', and common breakdown values. However, it does not describe other parameters like 'account_id' or the expected format for custom field/breakdown arrays.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states it retrieves a performance report for a date range, specifying the date format. However, it does not differentiate from the sibling tool 'get_daily_performance', which likely has a similar purpose.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'get_daily_performance'. Context about when to choose this tool is missing.

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

• list_adsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations exist, yet the description only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits such as read-only nature, authentication needs, or pagination. For a list operation, minimal context is provided.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  A single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every word contributes to defining the tool's action and optional filter.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  For a simple tool with 2 optional parameters and an output schema, the description is adequate but lacks mention of required context (e.g., account_id effectively needed) or integration with sibling tools.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  The description maps account_id to 'for an ad account' and ad_group_id to filtering, adding meaning beyond the schema (which lacks descriptions). However, with 0% schema description coverage, it only provides basic mapping without details on format or constraints.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the verb 'List' and resource 'ads' in the context of an ad account, with an optional filter by ad_group_id. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list_accounts, list_ad_groups, and list_campaigns.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for listing ads, optionally filtered by ad_group_id, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this instead of alternatives or prerequisites like requiring an account_id.

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

• list_campaignsA
  3.5/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It only mentions the default account ID, omitting details like read-only nature, pagination, or side effects.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single, front-loaded sentence with no unnecessary words. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's core function.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Adequate for a simple list tool given the output schema exists, but lacks information on pagination, error handling, or filtering capabilities.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaningful context by explaining the default behavior of account_id, beyond the schema's bare type and default null.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the tool lists campaigns for an ad account, with a specific verb and resource. It differentiates from sibling tools like list_ad_groups and list_ads.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_accounts or list_ad_groups. The default account ID is noted but context for selection is missing.

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

• list_accountsA
  4.2/5.0
  Behavior4/5

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

  Without annotations, the description discloses the internal walking mechanism ('walks /me/businesses → businesses/{id}/ad_accounts'), providing good insight into the tool's behavior. However, it lacks details on rate limits or authorization nuances.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The description is a single, concise sentence with a helpful parenthetical, front-loading the core action and resource without unnecessary words.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  The description explains the underlying API calls and the scope of results. Though an output schema exists, the description provides sufficient context for a list tool; however, details about potential pagination or limits are absent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With zero parameters and 100% schema coverage, the description adds context about the scope of results ('every account reachable'), meeting the baseline expectation for parameterless tools.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description clearly states the action ('List') and the resource ('every Reddit ad account reachable with the current credentials'), differentiating it from sibling tools focused on performance, ad groups, ads, and campaigns.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description implies usage for discovering accounts accessible to the current credentials but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide any exclusion conditions.

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