get_store_ads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It describes a read operation and key return fields, but does not disclose pagination behavior, rate limits, authentication requirements, or whether returned data is complete or filtered. This leaves significant gaps.

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 with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded and the return structure is quickly summarized. Excellent conciseness.

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 lists key return fields, which is helpful given the lack of an output schema. However, it does not mention potential pagination, the number of ads returned, or how this tool relates to sibling tools like 'search_ads' and 'get_ad'. This leaves the agent with incomplete context for selecting and invoking 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?

Schema coverage is 100% for the single parameter 'domain', which is already described as 'The store domain (e.g. 'gymshark.com').' The description adds no additional semantic context beyond what the schema provides, so a 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?

The description clearly states it gets advertisements for a specific store and lists the returned fields (platform, image URL, landing URL, date range). However, it does not distinguish itself from sibling tools 'search_ads' and 'get_ad', which could overlap.

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 only says 'for a specific store' but provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_ads' (which may search across stores) or 'get_ad' (which may retrieve a single ad). No exclusions or context for appropriate use are given.

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