archive_sd_product_ads

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It labels the operation as a 'guarded write' but does not explain what that entails (e.g., permissions, reversibility, rate limits) or what 'archive' actually does to the ads.

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 short but includes an irrelevant server note that adds no value for an agent. The first sentence is concise, but the second sentence should be omitted or moved elsewhere.

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 guarded write tool with preview and archive modes, the description lacks essential context: prerequisites, effects of archiving, how preview differs from execution, and how parameters interact. The agent cannot fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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 the baseline is 3. However, the description adds no additional meaning to parameters like 'changes' (vaguely defined as high-level desired changes with additionalProperties:true) or 'preview' vs 'dry_run'. The agent gets no guidance on how to construct valid input.

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 identifies the tool as previewing or archiving Sponsored Display product ads, distinguishing it from sibling tools that target campaigns or ad groups. However, the note about the server being an introspection stub is tangential and could confuse purpose.

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 like archive_sd_ad_groups or create_sd_product_ads. The description does not clarify the difference between preview and archive actions, leaving the agent to guess.

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