list_rich_media_creatives

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits but fails to mention pagination behavior, default/max limit, or the read-only nature beyond the verb 'list'. The claim 'List all' conflicts with the limit/offset parameters, suggesting incomplete or potentially misleading information.

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, concise sentence with no filler or redundant phrasing. It gets straight to the point, though it lacks any additional structural breakdown such as field descriptions or examples.

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?

The description is minimal. With no output schema or annotations, it fails to explain what a rich media creative is, what fields are returned, or how pagination works. The 'all' wording also oversimplifies the behavior given the limit/offset parameters.

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 fully describes both parameters (limit and offset) with clear descriptions, providing 100% schema coverage. Per guidelines, the baseline is 3; the description itself adds no extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already says.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and a clear resource ('rich media creatives'), which distinguishes it from sibling list tools like list_video_creatives, list_audio_creatives, and list_rich_media_ad_items. The phrase 'List all' also conveys a comprehensive listing intent.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_creatives, list_all_creatives, or other resource-specific list tools. No usage context, prerequisites, or exclusions are provided.

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