Create ad unit mapping

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint=false annotation, the description discloses a specific authorization requirement ('Requires the admob.monetization scope') and clarifies the adapter-based linkage behavior. It does not detail side effects, but for a create operation the core behavior is adequately covered.

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 three short, purposeful sentences: the first states the action, the second gives a prerequisite, the third states the required scope. No fluff, front-loaded.

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?

With four parameters including a nested object, the description covers purpose, prerequisite, and auth. It does not mention return values, but since there is no output schema, that omission is a minor gap for a straightforward create operation.

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% and each parameter has a description. The description adds valuable context by instructing that adapterId and adUnitConfigurations keys come from list_adapters, which helps the agent correctly populate these 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 states a specific verb (creates), a clear resource (ad unit mapping), and the exact linkage (AdMob ad unit to third-party network placement via adapter). This distinguishes it from siblings like list_ad_unit_mappings and create_app.

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 explicitly tells the agent to get the adapter ID and configuration keys from list_adapters, providing a clear prerequisite and pointing to a complementary tool. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use this tool or mention alternative mapping creation paths.

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