Update ad plan (campaign)

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

Annotations already indicate mutation (readOnlyHint=false), idempotency, and non-destructive nature. Description adds context that money fields are in account currency. No contradictions and adds some behavioral detail.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with key information. Every word earns its place. Efficient and clear.

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?

No output schema, but update tool typically returns updated object or success; description omits this. However, annotations and sibling context provide enough to infer. Could mention idempotency or extra field behavior, but overall adequate for a straightforward update.

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 description adds minimal extra value. It repeats 'account currency' for money fields and explains 'extra' parameter similarly to schema. Adequate but not enhancing beyond baseline.

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?

Clear verb 'Updates' and specific resource 'ad plan' with explicit fields (name, budgets, bid cap, dates). Distinguishes from sibling tool ad_plan_action for status changes.

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 ad_plan_action to change status', providing clear when-not guidance. Implies use for updating fields, no confusion with alternatives.

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