List ads

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is known without the description. The description adds nothing beyond the HTTP path — no filter semantics, no result shape, no pagination, no rate-limit context.

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?

It is short and front-loaded with no filler, but the brevity comes from omission rather than efficiency. A single sentence that conveys almost no information is not 'concise' in a useful sense.

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 two-parameter list tool with no output schema and zero schema descriptions, the description should at minimum explain the filters and what is returned. It does neither, leaving the agent to guess at behavior before calling.

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% for two parameters (status, adGroupId), so the description carries the full burden of explaining them — yet it says nothing. The enum values in $defs are visible, but how filtering by status or adGroupId behaves (multi-value? defaults? archived included?) is completely undocumented.

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 names a verb and resource ('List ads') and the underlying endpoint (GET /v1/ads), so the basic operation is identifiable. But it is essentially a restatement of the tool title and gives no distinction from siblings like ads_create, ads_update, or adGroups_list beyond the word 'list'.

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, no mention of prerequisites, scoping, or pagination expectations. The agent must infer everything from the name and the sibling list.

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