Delete custom audience

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds meaningful context beyond them: the operation is a soft-delete (not permanent destruction) and the open-world side effect that "line items targeting it will stop matching." This usefully clarifies what actually happens given openWorldHint=true, going beyond the bare annotation signal.

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 sentences with zero filler: the core action is front-loaded, followed by the consequence and the confirmation condition. Every clause carries information an agent needs, and no structured-field content is redundantly repeated.

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 simple three-parameter delete tool with annotations carrying the safety profile)Skip and no output schema required, the description is nearly complete: it covers the operation type, the downstream effect, and the confirmation gate. The only notable gap is that custom_audience_id provenance (from x_ads_list_audiences) is not indicated.

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 only 33% (only account_id is documented), so the description must compensate. It does add real value by explaining the confirm parameter's semantics — that it should only be set true after the user names the audience. However, custom_audience_id remains entirely undocumented in both schema and description, with no hint about where to obtain it (e.g., x_ads_list_audiences).

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 verb and resource combination — "Soft-delete a custom audience" — which clearly identifies the action and target. The soft-delete qualifier adds meaningful nuance beyond the title and hints at differentiation from hard-delete operations like the generic x_ads_delete sibling, though it doesn't explicitly name an alternative.

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 provides a clear usage condition for the confirm parameter ("confirm=true after the user named the audience"), which implies a confirmation-gating pattern. However, it never addresses tool selection — when to choose this over x_ads_delete, x_ads_set_status, or x_ads_update_audience — and the line-item consequence is stated as a fact rather than a selection criterion.

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