update_sp_negative_keyword_state

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

The description labels it as a 'guarded write' and mentions 'Preview or set', hinting at behavioral safeguards. It also transparently states it's a stub. However, it does not disclose what state transitions occur (e.g., active/paused) 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 brief, two sentences, and front-loaded with key information. However, the brackets and phrasing could be streamlined 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?

Without an output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or what 'state' changes mean. It only mentions preview/set and stub nature, leaving important context about effects and responses missing.

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% with descriptions for all 5 parameters. The description adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 indicates the tool is for updating Sponsored Products negative keyword state, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'archive_sp_negative_keywords' by focusing on state changes. However, mentioning 'Preview or set' creates slight ambiguity about whether it previews or actually updates.

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?

There is no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. The description notes it is a stub for introspection, implying it should not be used for actual writes in this local server, but no alternatives or context are provided.

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