ads_add_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of explaining behavior. It only states that keywords are added and does not disclose consequences for duplicates, whether existing keywords are modified, required permissions, error conditions, or whether the operation is idempotent. For a mutation tool this is a meaningful gap.

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 a single short sentence with no filler or redundancy. It is front-loaded and easy to parse, though it sacrifices useful context for brevity.

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 tool is relatively simple and the schema fully documents the required parameters, but with no annotations and no output schema the description leaves behavioral questions open, such as duplicate handling, bid defaults, and whether finalUrl or status are optional. It is minimally sufficient but not complete for a mutating 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so the parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description adds no new semantic meaning beyond the schema, which is acceptable but earns only the baseline score.

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 action (adds), the object (keywords), and the target context (ad group). It is specific enough to distinguish this from listing or fetching keywords among the sibling tools, though it does not name the platform or mention any constraints that would set it apart from similar create operations.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus related tools such as ads_list_keywords, ads_get_keyword_ideas, or ads_update_campaign. No preconditions, restrictions, or alternative conditions are mentioned, so an agent must infer appropriate usage from the name alone.

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