list_rich_media_ad_items

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

Annotations are not provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the action without mentioning pagination behavior, default limits, whether the operation is read-only, or what response structure to expect. This is a minimal description that adds no behavioral context beyond the tool name.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero wasted words. It directly communicates the core purpose, making it highly concise and well-structured for a simple list operation.

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 lack of annotations, no output schema, and 2 parameters, the description is too sparse to be complete. It does not explain pagination semantics, whether this includes draft or archived items, or how it relates to draft_list_rich_media_ad_items. The richness of the surrounding tool ecosystem (many list variants) requires more disambiguation.

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?

The input schema provides complete descriptions for both parameters (limit and offset), so the description does not need to repeat them. However, it also does not add any extra context such as default pagination behavior or how offset interacts with the list. Schema coverage is high, so 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 tool lists all rich media ad items, using a specific verb and resource. The 'rich media' qualifier differentiates it from sibling tools like list_image_ad_items, list_custom_html_ad_items, and list_native_ad_items, making its purpose unambiguous.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. For example, there is a draft_list_rich_media_ad_items sibling tool, and this description does not clarify whether this tool lists only published items or how it differs from other list ad item tools. The usage context is entirely implied by the name.

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