upload_ad_video

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the burden. It discloses that Meta downloads from a public URL rather than receiving bytes, that processing is asynchronous and the video_id is not immediately ready for flexible creatives, and that local file paths are unsupported. These are important behavioral traits beyond the schema.

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 well-structured with clear sections for purpose, behavior, args, and returns, and the key warning about async processing is front-loaded. It has slight redundancy, such as mentioning create_ad_creative twice, but every paragraph earns its place.

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 is complete for the tool's complexity: it explains the async lifecycle, return shape, constraints on video_url, and how to use the result in create_ad_creative. The output schema exists but the description additionally clarifies practical usage and readiness checks.

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 0%, but the description compensates thoroughly by documenting all six parameters. It provides account_id format (act_XXXXXXXXX), video_url constraints (public, mp4, no file://), optional name/title/description, and access_token session fallback—all beyond the bare schema titles.

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 opens with a specific action: 'Sube un VIDEO a la cuenta publicitaria para usarlo luego en un anuncio', which clearly identifies the resource and purpose. It also references the downstream tool create_ad_creative and differentiates from the sibling upload_ad_image.

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 explains the intended flow: upload the video, use video_id in create_ad_creative, and check get_ad_video for readiness before using in flexible creatives. It does not explicitly say 'use X instead', but the context and sibling distinction are clear.

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