Get Ad Performance

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 behavioral disclosure. It only states that metrics are returned; it does not mention aggregation level, date-range handling, managed-account requirements, pagination, or response shape. This is minimal for a reporting tool with no annotation safety signals.

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 filler words. It states the action and the exact resource scope, making it appropriately concise for its purpose.

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 presence of an output schema and 100% parameter schema coverage means an agent can invoke the tool with the required customer_id. However, sibling ambiguity and lack of usage guidance make the description only minimally complete; it does not help an agent decide between this and closely related performance-report tools.

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 schema already documents all four parameters and their formats/defaults. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('performance metrics for individual ads/creatives'), which clearly identifies the tool's scope. This granularity distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_campaign_performance, get_ad_group_performance, and get_keyword_performance.

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 phrase 'individual ads/creatives' implies the tool is for ad-level or creative-level reporting, which helps separate it from campaign/ad group/keyword reports. However, it never explicitly states when to use this tool instead of a sibling such as get_asset_performance or get_ad_group_performance.

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