keyso_get_report_group_context_ads_rid

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the burden of behavioral disclosure. It only gives the HTTP method and path, plus an example URL. It does not describe pagination behavior, default sort, response format, or whether filters apply to ads in any particular way.

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 includes the method, path, and an example request. The example is useful and front-loaded. It could be slightly more structured, but overall it is concise and informative without unnecessary filler.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, the description provides only the HTTP endpoint and a sample call. It lacks information about return shape, error cases, or how ads differ from related context group endpoints. It is minimally adequate for a simple retrieval endpoint but leaves operational gaps.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all parameters. The description adds minimal value beyond the example URL, which demonstrates rid, sort, page, and per_page usage. It does not explain the rid semantics beyond 'Идентификатор отчёта' or clarify filter syntax, but the schema already covers the basics.

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 'Контекстная реклама - объявления группы' identifies the resource as context ads group records, and the path clarifies it fetches ads for a specific report group. It is clear enough to distinguish from siblings like group context keywords or concurents, though it does not explicitly name a sibling or state the action verb (e.g., 'get').

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 implies this tool is for retrieving context ads data within a report group, which is suggested by the path and sibling names. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like context_ads_links or context_ads_facts, nor does it mention prerequisites such as having a valid report rid.

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