create_ad_group

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

Annotations already indicate a non-read, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation. The description adds some behavioral context, such as target_cpa overriding campaign-level values and status representing the initial state, but does not disclose side effects, return behavior, or validation constraints beyond what the schema and annotations cover.

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 compact docstring with a one-sentence purpose followed by a clean Args list. Every bullet adds meaningful information, and there is no redundant or fluff content.

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?

All seven parameters are explained, which is essential given the 0% schema coverage. The only gaps are that the description does not mention what the tool returns on success, and it does not clarify when to use cpc_bid versus target_cpa based on campaign bidding strategy. These are minor for a create tool with no output schema.

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%, so the description carries full responsibility for parameter semantics. It explains every parameter, including cpc_bid with a currency example, target_cpa's override behavior, ad_group_type with concrete enum examples, and the default status. This goes well beyond the bare schema.

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 opens with 'Create a new ad group in a campaign,' which states a specific verb, resource, and scope. This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like update_ad_group and set_ad_group_status, and aligns with the tool name without being tautological.

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 context is clear: this is the tool for creating ad groups, and sibling names like update_ad_group and set_ad_group_status imply alternatives for modification or status changes. It does not explicitly state when not to use it, but the creation-only framing is unambiguous.

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