archive_sp_targets

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

The description tags the tool as '[Ads / guarded write]', indicating authorization requirements, and states it is a stub. However, without annotations, it fails to detail behaviors such as how preview differs from archiving, reversibility, or side effects.

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 that efficiently conveys the purpose and context, with no extraneous words.

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?

While the schema covers parameters and the description notes this is a stub, it lacks information about the output or return values. For an introspection stub, this may be acceptable, but it could be improved by clarifying what preview/archive results look like.

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?

All 5 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), so the schema already defines their meanings. The tool description adds no additional context about parameters beyond what the schema provides.

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's action ('preview or archive') and the resource ('Sponsored Products targets'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'archive_sp_negative_targets' by specifying 'Sponsored Products' 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 notes that this is a 'hosted endpoint only' and an 'introspection stub', implying it's not functional in this environment, but it does not provide explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like archive_sp_negative_targets.

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