search

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It indicates this is a 'read tool' (implying no mutation), but does not disclose potential side effects, error handling, rate limits, or the format of returned rows beyond 'rows'. More behavioral detail would be helpful.

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 well-structured: a clear purpose statement, a scope statement, and a representative example. The example is necessary to demonstrate GAQL syntax and does not add unnecessary fluff.

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 absence of an output schema, the description provides a solid overview but lacks details on pagination, result ordering, or potential errors. For a general-purpose query tool, the example helps but could be supplemented with notes on large result sets or performance considerations.

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 well by providing a full example query that illustrates the 'query' parameter's expected syntax and structure. However, it does not clarify the 'customer_id' parameter format (e.g., dashes or not), leaving some ambiguity.

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 runs GAQL queries and returns rows, with a specific verb ('Run') and resource ('GAQL query'). It also distinguishes itself as the 'general-purpose read tool' for Google Ads, differentiating it from sibling tools like list_campaigns or campaign_performance, which are specialized.

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?

It explicitly frames the tool as the general-purpose read tool, implying it is the fallback for anything not covered by specialized list tools. However, it does not explicitly mention when to avoid it or name alternatives, leaving some ambiguity for an agent to infer.

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