See a brand's ads

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

readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read, and the description usefully adds what the result contains (hook, format, copy, run duration) in the absence of an output schema. It does not disclose whether results are scoped to the saved brand, whether pagination or result limits apply, or any rate-limit behavior.

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?

A single tight sentence with the resource first and the useful return detail trailing, no filler and nothing redundant with the title.

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 read-only, parameterless tool with no output schema, the description covers the return shape reasonably but omits the crucial operational fact of which brand is queried and how to change it. An agent can invoke it, but cannot predict its scope or routing relative to search_ads.

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 schema has zero parameters, so per the baseline there is nothing for the description to clarify. The one relevant semantic gap is that the implicit brand context (how the 'brand' is resolved with no argument) is left unstated, which slightly undercuts an otherwise clean 0-param case.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('See a brand's ads') and even enumerates the payload ('hook, format, copy and how long each one has been running'). It does not differentiate itself from plausible siblings such as search_ads or research_tiktok_ads, so the agent must infer which ad-listing tool to choose.

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 when-to-use guidance, no statement of alternatives, and no prerequisite named. Given the tool takes zero parameters, the agent is never told that it presumably operates on the brand already saved via save_my_brand/get_my_brand, which is essential context for calling it sensibly.

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