meta_adset_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It conveys a read-only operation via 'Get' and discloses the type of metrics returned. It does not discuss behaviors such as pagination, data freshness, access requirements, or handling of missing data, but for a simple read tool this is acceptable, and there is no contradiction.

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 that concisely states the action and expected output metrics. Every word earns its place, with no redundant or filler content.

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?

For a tool with five parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the core purpose and the metrics returned. It addresses the key ambiguity of campaign-level vs. account-level scope, though it omits details about output structure or edge cases. Overall, it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward insights 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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds context about campaign or account scoping but does not meaningfully extend the parameter definitions already provided in the schema, such as 'Filter to a specific campaign ID'.

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 ('Get') and the resource ('performance insights for ad sets'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like meta_campaign_insights and meta_ad_insights by focusing specifically on ad-set-level data, listing key metrics (spend, impressions, clicks, conversions) and the scope ('within a campaign or account').

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 implies usage when ad-set-level performance data is needed, and the phrase 'within a campaign or account' provides context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives (e.g., campaign vs. ad insights) or when not to use this tool, so guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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