gads_conversions_by_campaign

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses default time range and sorting order, but does not state that it is a read-only operation, auth requirements, or potential data latency. The behavior is implicitly safe but not fully transparent.

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 very concise, using a single sentence plus additional notes. It is front-loaded with the purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured by separating parameter info.

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?

Given the complexity of 4 parameters and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on return format, parameter specifications, and usage context, which are needed for correct invocation.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only hints at start_date/end_date defaults via 'Default last 28 days', but does not describe customer_id, limit, or the meaning of the fields. This leaves significant gaps for the agent.

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 clearly states the tool retrieves conversions and conversion value broken down by campaign and conversion action, with sorting by conversions descending. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like gads_campaign_performance or gads_keyword_performance, which do not include the conversion action breakdown.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies its use case by specifying the breakdown, but lacks guidance on when not to use it or how it differs from other performance reports.

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