get_creative_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It implies a read operation (get details) but does not explicitly state it is read-only, nor does it mention any side effects, authorization needs, or rate limits. Given the criticality with missing annotations, the description falls short.

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 and front-loaded with the purpose. The parameter section is clearly separated and efficient. Slightly more brevity could be achieved, but it is well-structured and informative.

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?

The description explains what fields are returned and documents both parameters well. However, it lacks details on return format, error states, or pagination. Given no output schema, more context would be beneficial, but it is adequate for a simple retrieval tool.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the schema: it explains creative_id is a numeric string, and account_id is optional with the specific consequence that image hashes will not be resolved to URLs if omitted. With 0% schema coverage, this high-quality parameter documentation justifies 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 identifies the tool's action (get full creative details) and lists specific returned fields (mode classification, media URLs, object_story_spec, etc.), distinguishing it from siblings like get_ad_creatives which probably list creatives rather than get full details.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. It only states what it does without any context on appropriate scenarios, prerequisites, or when to avoid using it. This is a clear gap.

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