add_ads

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that ads enter DRAFT status after creation and require moderation. The confirm parameter's behavior (dry-run vs execution) is explained. Max character limits for fields are stated. No contradictions with annotations (none present).

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 well-structured with a clear purpose, bullet-pointed args, and tips. It is somewhat long but each sentence adds value. Could be slightly more concise, but given the complexity of nested ad objects, the length is justified.

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 description covers parameter details and usage workflow well, but misses the return value (e.g., what is returned on success? List of ad IDs?). No output schema exists, so the description should mention this. Error handling or prerequisites (like existence of ad groups) are not covered. Otherwise, it's fairly complete.

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 0%, so the description must explain both parameters. The ads parameter is detailed with required fields (AdGroupId, TextAd dict) and optional fields with constraints (max lengths, defaults). The confirm parameter is described as controlling execution vs dry-run. This adds significant meaning beyond the input 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 starts with 'Create text ads in ad groups', which clearly states the verb (create) and resource (text ads in ad groups). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_ad_groups (which creates groups) and update_ads (which modifies existing ads).

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 clear context about post-creation workflow (ads go to DRAFT status and need moderation via moderate_ads). It also suggests creating 2-3 ads per group for A/B testing. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or compare it with alternatives like add_keywords.

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