get_ad_groups

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. However, it only states the basic retrieval operation and does not mention that it is read-only, any required authentication, pagination behavior, or the hard cap on the 'limit' parameter (which is only in the schema). The description omits important behavioral traits beyond the obvious.

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 a single 13-word sentence that is concise, front-loaded, and contains no filler. Every word is necessary to convey the tool's core function and optional filters.

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?

Given that an output schema exists and schema coverage is complete, the description is adequate but minimal. It does not mention the 'limit' parameter's role or any constraints on customer_id format (though schema covers it). For a tool with siblings that have similar names, it provides just enough context but could be more informative.

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 baseline is 3. The description mentions 'optional filtering by campaign and status', which maps to 'campaign_id' and 'status_filter', but adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's own parameter descriptions. It does not elaborate on valid values or usage patterns for the parameters.

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 'Get ad groups for a customer, with optional filtering by campaign and status.' It specifies the verb 'Get', the resource 'ad groups', the target 'customer', and the optional filters, effectively distinguishing it from sibling mutation tools like 'create_ad_group' or 'pause_ad_group'.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'run_gaql_query' for custom queries, or other get tools for different resources). It does not mention prerequisites, such as having a valid customer_id, nor does it suggest avoiding this tool for other purposes.

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