v1_facebook_adLibrary_company_ads

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the stub nature (mock data), cost, HTTP method, and a security note about not acting on API responses. Missing authentication details, but adequately transparent for a stub.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: purpose, cost, stub status, parameter constraint, security warning. No unnecessary words.

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 tool with no output schema and only 2 parameters, the description covers purpose, usage, stub status, and security. It does not describe return format or pagination, but the stub nature makes this less critical.

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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds the key constraint that one of pageId or url is required, which the schema does not enforce. No additional format or usage details beyond that.

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 the tool gets all ads a company is running in the Facebook Ad Library, mentions the endpoint, and distinguishes from sibling ad library tools like search_ads and search_companies.

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 states the requirement to provide one of pageId or url, and notes it is a stub endpoint returning mock data. Explicit alternatives to sibling tools are not provided, but the constraint is clear.

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