ads_list_keywords

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that the tool lists keywords, with no mention of read-only behavior, pagination, default filters, ordering, or required authentication context. This is a minimal statement of operation rather than a disclosure of behavioral traits.

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, front-loaded sentence with no redundant content. It earns its place but is limited in substance; however, for a simple list operation, the structure is appropriate and concise.

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?

With no output schema and no behavioral annotations, the description is too sparse to fully inform an agent. It does not clarify return format, whether adGroupId or campaignId are required filter contexts, what status defaults to, or how limits behave. The tool has five parameters, so the single-sentence description leaves significant gaps.

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 only 20%, with customerId being the only documented parameter. The description adds no meaning to limit, status, adGroupId, or campaignId, and does not explain how filters combine or affect results. Although the parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, the description fails to compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 verb 'lists' and the resource 'keywords in a Google Ads account,' making the basic purpose obvious. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like ads_add_keywords or ads_get_keyword_ideas, but the listing action is 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?

No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor are any exclusions or related tools mentioned. The description simply states what it does, leaving the agent to infer appropriate usage from the name and sibling list.

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