archive_sd_negative_targets

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

With no annotations, the description must compensate but only labels the tool as a 'guarded write' and mentions preview/archive. It fails to disclose side effects (e.g., whether archive deactivates or deletes), required permissions, or rate limits. The behavioral traits are minimally disclosed.

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 sentence plus a contextual note, which is concise and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the note about the introspection stub is somewhat meta and could be restructured for clarity.

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 tool has 5 optional parameters, no output schema, and no annotations. The description lacks details about the expected behavior of 'preview' vs 'archive', the structure of 'changes', or any post-archive state. This leaves significant gaps for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no additional meaning to the parameters beyond what the schema already provides, such as clarifying the relationship between 'preview' and 'dry_run' or the format of the 'changes' array.

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 previews or archives Sponsored Display negative targets, specifying both the resource ('negative targets') and actions ('preview or archive'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'archive_sd_targets' which target non-negative targets.

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 description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'update_sd_negative_target_state' or 'create_sd_negative_targets'. It only mentions it's an introspection stub, which does not help the agent decide between similar tools.

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