get_adset_leads

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

The description discloses a key behavioral requirement: 'Requires leads_retrieval permission,' which is valuable since no annotations are provided. However, it doesn't mention pagination (despite after/limit parameters), return format, or rate limits, so it only partially covers the transparency burden.

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 one short, front-loaded sentence that states the core purpose and a necessary permission note. Every word is meaningful, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 tool lacks an output schema and annotations, so the description must carry more weight. It covers the core purpose and permission, but doesn't explain what the response contains (e.g., a list of leads) or pagination behavior, leaving some gaps for an agent to infer. For a simple read operation with comprehensive parameter schemas, this is minimally acceptable.

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?

The input schema covers all four parameters with descriptions, meeting the 100% coverage baseline. The description adds no extra parameter-level information beyond reinforcing that the tool targets a specific ad set, so it neither improves nor detracts from 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 clearly states the action ('Get leads') and the resource ('a specific ad set'), which precisely differentiates it from sibling tools like get_campaign_leads. It is specific, uses a strong verb, and leaves no ambiguity about the tool's scope.

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 phrase 'a specific ad set' implies the use case and distinguishes from campaign-level leads, but it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions. There is no guidance on choosing between this and similar tools like get_form_leads, leaving the context implied rather than explicit.

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