update_ad_creative

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that Meta API does not allow changing most creative fields, implying this tool only updates the name. Behavior is clearly limited to name updates. However, it does not mention permissions, error conditions, or side effects, which are minor omissions for a simple mutation.

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 extremely concise: two short paragraphs and a bulleted arg list. It front-loads the main purpose, then the critical limitation, then the alternative, then args. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 the tool's simplicity (2 params, no output schema), the description is sufficiently complete. It explains what the tool does, its limitations, and its arguments. It could optionally mention the return value (e.g., success indicator), but this is not essential for a typical update operation.

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 meaning beyond the input schema by explicitly naming and describing each parameter: 'creative_id: Creative ID to update' and 'name: New creative name.' The schema only provides titles with no descriptions (coverage 0%), so the description fills that gap effectively.

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 updates an existing ad creative's name, distinguishing it from create_ad_creative and other siblings. The verb 'update' paired with the specific resource 'ad creative' and the scope 'name' leaves no ambiguity.

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 explicitly tells when to use this tool (to update name) and when not to (for changing copy, headline, CTA, or link URL). It provides a clear alternative: create a new creative and swap on the ad, thus preventing misuse.

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