Ad Groups Set Ad Group Status

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

Annotations already flag the operation as destructive and non-idempotent. The description adds the key operational requirement that REMOVED requires confirm=true and explicitly names the affected resource. This is meaningful context beyond what the annotations alone provide, with no contradiction.

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 compact sentence with the action list front-loaded and the critical confirm requirement stated immediately after. Every word earns its place; there is no filler or redundant elaboration.

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?

For a 6-parameter mutation with full schema coverage and an output schema, the description captures the essential operation and the safety precondition. It does not describe response shape or permissions, but those are reasonably covered by the output schema and annotations. The tool can be invoked correctly from this description.

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 parameters are already well documented. The description repeats the status enum and the confirm requirement without adding materially new semantic detail beyond the schema. 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?

The description opens with a precise action set ('Enables, pauses or removes') on a specific resource ('an ad group'), which maps directly to the tool name and the status enum. It is easy to distinguish from sibling tools like ads_set_ad_status, campaigns_set_campaign_status, and ad_groups_set_keyword_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?

The description implies the use case: changing an ad group's lifecycle status among ENABLED, PAUSED, or REMOVED. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to choose this over the sibling status tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites. This is adequate but leaves routing to inference.

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