get_minimum_budgets

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It correctly implies a read-only retrieval and says a dictionary is returned, but it does not disclose default/null behavior, error conditions, account-permission needs, or rate-limit expectations.

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 purpose is front-loaded, and the Args/Returns section is compact with no wasted words. Every sentence adds useful information for calling the tool.

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 2-parameter getter with an output schema, the essential call contract is covered: purpose, required act_id, optional bid_strategy, and return shape. A note on omitted bid_strategy behavior would make it fully complete.

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 0%, but the description compensates by explaining act_id with a concrete act_1234567890 example and listing realistic bid_strategy values. The only gap is not explicitly stating what happens when bid_strategy is null, though the schema default helps there.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Get the minimum daily budget requirements for different campaign objectives and bid strategies.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling getters by naming the exact budget-related resource and the dimensions it covers.

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 when-to-use guidance or comparison to alternatives is provided. The description does not clarify how this relates to sibling tools like get_reach_estimate or get_delivery_estimate, nor does it state a preferred selection context.

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