Google Ads MCP Capabilities

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, making the tool's behavior clear. The description adds further transparency by stating it does not read or expose secrets, providing extra assurances beyond annotations.

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 only two sentences, front-loaded with the key purpose, and every word adds value. No redundancy or filler.

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 simple informational tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers all necessary context: what it explains, what it does not do, and the output format choice. Complete given the tool's simplicity.

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?

The only parameter, response_format, is well-defined in the input schema with an enum and default. However, the description does not mention it at all, and schema coverage is 0%, so the agent must rely solely on the schema. For a simple enum, this is adequate but not enhanced.

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's purpose: to explain supported data, mutation gating, privacy modes, and agent workflow. It also explicitly states what it does NOT do (read ads or expose secrets), which distinguishes it from sibling tools that perform reads or mutations.

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 for understanding tool capabilities, and the negative statement 'Does not read Google Ads' serves as a guideline for when not to use it. However, no explicit alternatives are mentioned among the many sibling tools.

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