update_adset

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It clearly discloses the supervised write behavior with pre-write snapshot, validation, and post-verify. It also details budget enforcement and targeting merge rules, offering rich behavioral context beyond a simple update.

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 well-structured with a summary line, behavioral notes, and a detailed Args list. It is informative without being overly verbose, though the notes on budgets and targeting could be slightly streamlined. Overall, it earns its length.

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 8 parameters, the description thoroughly covers the tool's behavior, budget rules, targeting semantics, and status transitions. It includes an example for targeting_json, making it complete for an update tool with complex constraints.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully. Each parameter in the Args section includes allowed values, constraints, and format examples (e.g., daily_budget 'Only allowed for ABO ad sets', targeting_json example). This adds significant meaning beyond the schema's type/optionality.

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 starts with 'Update an existing ad set,' clearly stating the verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like create_adset by specifying 'Supervised write - validates before applying,' making the purpose specific and unambiguous.

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 provides context on when to use (e.g., budget rules for ABO vs CBO, targeting partial updates) but does not explicitly mention when not to use or alternatives like create_adset. The sibling list includes update_campaign and create_adset, but the description lacks direct comparison, so a 4 is appropriate.

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