Export Budget Recommendations (Bulk-Edit Ready)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, so the description's job is to add context. It explains no write API calls are made (behavioral insight), but it doesn't disclose edge cases like missing recommendations or file size limits, so deduct one point.

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 well-structured: front-loaded with purpose and examples, each sentence adds unique value. No fluff. Fits in a readable block.

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 tool has no output schema, the description sufficiently covers return format behavior (CSV/file inline) and usage context. The sibling tools are diverse, but this description clearly distinguishes as an export tool. All relevant aspects are covered.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the purpose of each format beyond enum values (e.g., 'google_ads_csv produces platform-specific bulk-edit CSVs ready to paste'), and explains min_delta_pct with an example ('0.15 = only show changes >=15%'). Not all parameters get detailed examples, hence 4.

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 tool exports budget_analyze recommendations in multiple formats (Google Ads Editor CSV, Meta Ads Manager CSV, JSON, Markdown) and explains the action users can take. It distinguishes from sibling tools like budget_analyze and budget_reallocate by focusing on export, not analysis or execution.

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?

Explicitly provides when-to-use guidance: e.g., 'perfect for pause anything with CPA over 50… workflow', and when to use each format: platform=google with format=google_ads_csv for Google Ads Editor, etc. Also notes that AdOps does not call write APIs, so the tool provides ready-to-paste CSVs instead.

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