List ads

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

Annotations already mark the tool read-only and open-world, and the description adds meaningful behavior beyond them: rows expose status and tweet_id, deleted ads are suppressed unless with_deleted=true, and the underlying post is never deleted. This is useful transparency, though it does not cover pagination/cursor behavior.

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 short sentences with no redundant wording: the description moves from the main operation to row fields, filtering, and deletion semantics. Every sentence earns its place.

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 read-only list operation with no output schema, the description covers the main output fields, an optional filter, and the important soft-delete behavior. It is slightly incomplete around pagination and the full row shape, but the annotations and schema provide enough context for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 20%, so the description partially compensates by explaining line_item_id as a filter and with_deleted as the switch that reveals deleted ads. However, count and cursor receive no semantic guidance in either the description or the schema, leaving a clear gap.

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 identifies the operation as listing ads/promoted posts, and adds concrete output hints ('status and tweet_id') and a filter ('line_item_id') that help avoid confusion with sibling list tools. It does not explicitly name sibling alternatives, so it stops just short of top marks.

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?

Usage is implied by the list semantics and by the filtering/deleted-ads guidance, but the description does not state when to prefer this over sibling list tools such as x_ads_list_creatives or x_ads_list_line_items. It provides some context but no explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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