List ad plans (campaigns)

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world nature. The description adds context about money fields being in account currency, but does not disclose pagination behavior beyond what's in the schema. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a relevant detail about currency.

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?

For a tool with 6 optional parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains what is listed and adds the currency note. However, it could improve by briefly describing the response structure or pagination behavior, even though annotations and schema cover safety and pagination parameters.

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 has 100% description coverage for parameters, so baseline is 3. The description does not add significant additional meaning beyond the schema; it mentions filtering by id and status, but those are already described in the schema.

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 it lists ad plans (campaigns) with optional filtering by id and status, and clarifies that money fields are in account currency. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ad_plan_action (likely mutation) and create/update tools.

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 when listing ad plans with optional filters, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., list_ad_groups, list_banners) or when not to use it. Missing exclusions or contextual comparison.

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