update_campaign_audience_bid_adjustment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the guarded write nature and stub status, but does not explain what 'guarded' entails (e.g., auth requirements, rate limits) or preview 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?

Two sentences with no wasteful words: first states purpose, second provides critical context about the stub nature. Very concise and front-loaded.

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 description adequately explains this is a stub, but without an output schema, it does not describe return values or behavior of preview vs. set, leaving gaps for an agent fully utilizing 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 description coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no extra context beyond the schema; the parameters are well-described in the schema itself.

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 verb 'Preview or set' and the resource 'audience bid adjustments', which is specific and distinguishes it from siblings like update_campaign_bidding or update_target_bids.

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 this is a stub for a hosted guarded write, implying it is not fully functional locally and should be used via the hosted endpoint for real operations, but does not provide explicit when-to-use or alternatives guidance.

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