Fetch ads for a specific advertiser. Apply optional filters like ad group, page, and page size to narrow results.
Get ads for a specific advertiser with optional filtering
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| filters | No | ||
| page_size | No | ||
| adgroup_id | No | ||
| advertiser_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must convey behavioral traits. It only states the basic action and optional filtering, failing to disclose pagination behavior, the nature of filtering, or any side effects. The tool has parameters for page and page_size, but these are not mentioned.
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 short sentence, but it sacrifices informativeness for brevity. It fails to provide necessary details about parameters or usage, making it under-specified rather than 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?
Given the complexity of 5 parameters including optional filtering and pagination, the description is woefully incomplete. It lacks guidance on how to construct filters or use pagination, leaving critical gaps that are not filled by the schema or annotations. The presence of an output schema is noted but does not compensate.
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%, yet the description adds nothing about the five parameters. 'Optional filtering' does not explain how the 'filters' object works, nor does it address page, page_size, or adgroup_id. This leaves agents completely in the dark.
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 'Get' and the resource 'ads', constrained to 'a specific advertiser', which precisely identifies the tool's function. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on different resources like ad groups or reports.
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 provides no information on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites, exclusions, or typical use cases. Given the variety of sibling tools, this omission hinders correct selection.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.