get_pixels_tool

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden. It discloses the return fields (pixel_id, pixel_name, pixel_code, etc.) and mentions that it shows whether measurement is set up correctly, which is useful. However, it does not describe pagination behavior, rate limits, or side effects. As a read-only getter, this is partially sufficient but not comprehensive.

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?

Two sentences with zero wasted words. The main action is front-loaded, and the return fields are listed compactly. Excellent structure for quick scanning.

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 description covers the core purpose and return fields, but it lacks usage guidance and parameter semantics. Pagination via page/page_size is implied but not explained, and the output schema (though present) is not described. For a simple list tool it is adequate, but missing details prevent full self-sufficiency.

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%, meaning the schema provides no parameter descriptions. The tool description does not compensate: it only implies advertiser_id by saying 'for an advertiser' but offers no explanation of page, page_size, or their defaults. This is a significant gap for a 3-parameter tool.

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 'List' and resource 'TikTok Pixel installations' for an advertiser, and clarifies that it shows conversion events and measurement status. It is distinct from sibling get_pixel_event_stats_tool (which focuses on event statistics), though it does not explicitly name that alternative. The purpose is clear and unambiguous.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any related tools, exclusions, or conditions for use. An agent has no context on when this is preferable to other getters like get_pixel_event_stats_tool or get_reports_tool.

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