list_ad_items

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the aggregate scope across types, but does not mention pagination behavior, whether archived/draft items are included, or any rate limits. The description is not misleading but leaves important behavioral details unstated.

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 a single, efficient sentence that front-loads the action and resource, defines the colloquial term 'banners', and lists all relevant types. No filler or repetition.

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 simple list tool with paginated parameters and no output schema, the description adequately conveys the core function and scope. It could benefit from clarifying whether the list includes all advertisers or only a specific context, but it is sufficiently complete for basic selection.

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% with both 'limit' and 'offset' having descriptions. The description adds no parameter-specific details, but with full schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'ad items', and the scope 'across all types' with explicit enumeration of types (image, custom HTML, rich media, native, catalog). This distinguishes it from type-specific sibling tools like list_image_ad_items.

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 phrase 'across all types' implies this is the aggregate list tool, but it does not explicitly state when to use it over type-specific alternatives or mention any exclusions. No alternative tools are named, so guidance is only implied rather than explicit.

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