Ad Groups Set Keyword Status

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

Annotations already flag this as destructive, non-read-only, and non-idempotent; the description does not contradict those hints. It adds the operational guardrail that REMOVED requires confirm=true, though that is also present in the schema, and it does not describe the permanence or downstream effects of removal.

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 short and purposeful; the action and the one critical prerequisite are front-loaded. There is no filler or unnecessary repetition of the schema's enum values beyond the confirm caveat.

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 simple mutation tool with output schema, annotations, and 100% schema coverage, the description covers the core operation, the destructive-removal caveat, and the ID-lookup workflow. The only meaningful gap is explicit routing to or away from sibling keyword tools.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes beyond the schema by telling the agent exactly how to obtain criterion_ids ('Find criterion ids with search on ad_group_criterion'), which removes ambiguity about how to populate the key parameter.

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 specific verb set and an unambiguous resource: 'Pauses, enables or removes keywords (ad group criteria)'. It clearly distinguishes this status-mutation tool from sibling tools that add keywords or set ad-group/ads status. The parenthetical maps the non-obvious Google Ads term to keywords.

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 intended use is implied by the action statement, and the description supplies a useful prerequisite: find criterion ids via ad_group_criterion. However, it does not explicitly say when to choose this over alternatives such as ad_groups_add_keywords or ad_groups_set_ad_group_status, nor does it state any exclusions.

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