Update Ad Group

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

The only annotation is destructiveHint=true, and the description adds nothing beyond it. It does not disclose that setting status to REMOVED is irreversible or what other side effects the update has, so for a destructive mutation the description is thin relative to the safety profile it should explain.

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?

One tight sentence with the action and target front-loaded. Nothing is wasted, though it is arguably too terse to carry the needed behavioral context.

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?

With a rich schema and an output schema present, return values need not be explained. However, a destructive update tool should describe the irreversible REMOVED transition and the effect of applying only one of the two optional fields, which is missing.

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 status, cpc_bid, ad_group_id, customer_id, and validate_only. The description restates the two mutable fields without adding format, validation, or interaction detail, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb (Updates) and resource (ad group) plus the two mutable fields (status, default max CPC bid). This clearly separates it from create_ad_group and get_ad_group_performance, though it doesn't call out how it differs from sibling status setters like set_ad_status.

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?

No when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given, and no mention of prerequisites (e.g. that at least one mutable field should be supplied, or that validate_only is available). The agent must infer usage from the parameter names alone.

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