create_ad_creative

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it says nothing about permissions, whether image_hash must be pre-uploaded via upload_ad_image, what account context is required, or side effects. 'Create' is the only behavioral signal.

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?

One short sentence is technically concise and front-loaded, but at this size the brevity reflects under-specification rather than economy. There is nothing to trim because almost nothing was said.

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 9-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no parameter documentation, a single eight-word sentence is far too thin. The output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, but inputs, prerequisites, and sibling selection are all unaddressed.

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% and the description adds no parameter meaning whatsoever. Nine parameters, six required (name, page_id, image_hash, link_url, primary_text, headline), and the agent gets no help on what page_id, image_hash, or call_to_action's default 'LEARN_MORE' imply.

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 clear verb+resource and names the creative subtype ('link ad creative'), which implicitly distinguishes it from siblings like create_ad_video_creative and create_asset_feed_ad_creative. It stops short of explicitly differentiating, but an agent can route correctly.

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, no prerequisites, and no mention of the three sibling creative-creation tools it competes with. The agent must infer that a link creative (image + link_url) is selected over video or asset-feed creatives.

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