duplicate_adset

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

With no annotations, the description bears full burden. It discloses key behaviors: objects are PAUSED, no child ads, same-account only. However, it does not mention permissions, rate limits, side effects on source, or return value (no output schema). For a mutation tool, return information is important.

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?

Description is concise: a brief purpose statement followed by bullet points for parameters. No redundant information. Could be slightly more structured with clearer separation between purpose and args, but overall efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given no output schema and 5 parameters, the description covers duplication behavior and parameter semantics well. However, missing details on return value (expected response), error conditions, and permissions. For a tool with mutations and no annotations, this is a moderate gap.

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 0%, but the description compensates thoroughly. It explains each parameter: adset_id, target_campaign_id, account_id with constraint 'must match source', default for name_suffix (' - Copy'), and budget_override behavior (override in EUR, copies source if None). This adds significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Description clearly states 'Duplicate a single ad set into a target campaign within the same account.' It specifies the action (duplicate), resource (ad set), and target (campaign), distinguishing it from sibling 'duplicate_campaign' which duplicates entire campaigns. The inclusion of 'same-account only' further clarifies scope.

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?

Provides usage context: 'Does not duplicate child ads' and 'All created objects are PAUSED' inform when to use this tool (e.g., to copy an ad set without ads, starting in paused state). Implicitly distinguishes from 'create_adset' by focusing on duplication. However, lacks explicit comparison with alternatives like 'duplicate_campaign'.

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