Raw VK Ads API call

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

Annotations readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true are consistent. Description adds context: escape hatch nature, confirmWrite requirement for writes, and that GET runs freely. No mention of rate limits or auth specifics, but provides sufficient behavioral context beyond 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?

Three sentences with clear front-loading of purpose. Each sentence adds necessary information; no fluff or redundancy.

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?

Covers input parameters and behavioral rules well. No output schema, but for an escape hatch returning arbitrary data, describing return format is less critical. Missing error handling details, but overall adequate given tool complexity.

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%, baseline 3. Description adds meaning: explains query becomes query string, body as JSON for POST, confirmWrite must be true for writes. This adds value over the parameter descriptions 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?

Clearly states it is an escape hatch to call any VK Ads API endpoint directly, with an example path and method. Distinguishes from dedicated sibling tools by being the generic fallback.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this for endpoints that have no dedicated tool' and explains when GET is free versus POST/DELETE requiring confirmWrite. Does not explicitly say to prefer dedicated tools when available, but implied.

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