update_sd_negative_target_state

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the tool is a 'guarded write' and a local 'introspection stub', which is important behavioral context. However, it does not explain how the stub behaves (e.g., mock responses), what guardrails exist, or any side effects beyond being a stub.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the key action ('Preview or set...') and includes important context (guarded write, hosted endpoint, stub). No unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

Despite the tool being a complex 'introspection stub', the description lacks details on how the stub works (e.g., whether it returns static data or errors) and what the 'guarded write' implies. No output schema exists, so more behavioral context is needed for a write operation.

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 value by clarifying that 'preview' and 'dry_run' are aliases for validation/preview mode, and 'changes' represents 'high-level desired changes'. This enhances meaning beyond the schema's generic descriptions.

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 setting Sponsored Display negative target state, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like update_sd_target_state (targets vs negative targets) and update_sb/sp_negative_target_state (different ad types).

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 implies usage for Sponsored Display negative targets and mentions 'Hosted endpoint only' and 'introspection stub', but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool over similar tools (e.g., update_sd_target_state or update_sb_negative_target_state). No alternatives or exclusions are stated.

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