snap_list_ads

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds genuine behavioral context — it auto-paginates through every page and emits a note when the list is truncated — but says nothing about auth requirements, result volume, or failure behavior on an invalid squad ID.

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?

Two compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose followed by pagination behavior. No filler, though the parenthetical "(read-only)" partially repeats the readOnlyHint annotation.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the important operational detail — that all pages are fetched and truncation is flagged — is present. Missing only minor context about return shape and how to obtain a valid adsquad_id.

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 carries the burden, and it only conveys that the ID identifies an ad squad. The regex format constraint lives in the schema, but nothing here explains the ID's provenance (e.g., from snap_list_adsquads) or expected shape.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ("List ads") plus its scope ("in an ad squad"), which separates it from siblings like snap_list_adsquads or snap_competitor_ads by resource type. It does not explicitly name an alternative tool, so it falls just short of full sibling differentiation.

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 context is implied by the phrase "in an ad squad" — you call it when you have a squad ID and want its ads. There is no explicit when-not guidance or pointer to an alternative listing tool, so usage must be inferred.

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