Создать текстовую кампанию

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

The description discloses key behavioral details: if biddingStrategy is omitted, manual bids with networks off are applied; passing biddingStrategy fully enables auto strategy or networks. This goes beyond the annotations (which only indicate readOnly false) and gives the agent a clear picture of side effects.

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 concise—two sentences—and front-loads the primary purpose. It avoids unnecessary details and clearly presents the key usage caveat, making it easy to parse and act upon.

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?

There is no output schema, so return values are not required. The description suffices for a creation tool, covering defaults and how to modify behavior. It doesn't mention permissions or error handling, but these are not typically expected given the annotations and simplicity of the operation.

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?

The schema already covers each parameter with descriptions (100% coverage). The tool description adds valuable context about biddingStrategy's default and override behavior, which enhances understanding beyond the schema. It doesn't duplicate but complements, earning a 4.

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 creates a TextCampaign (text and graphic ads). It specifies the resource (campaign) and the action (create), and differentiates from siblings like create_ad_group or create_sitelinks_set by focusing on campaign creation.

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?

It explicitly explains when to use the tool: for creating a TextCampaign. It also provides concrete guidance on default behavior (manual bids, networks off) and how to override it via biddingStrategy, which helps the agent decide when and how to invoke it.

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