Get pixel last fired

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that results are per conversion event, but does not describe return shape, ordering, or pagination — modest added value against the lower bar set by annotations.

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?

A single tight sentence with the action and scope front-loaded and zero filler; every phrase earns its place.

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 one-parameter read-only tool with no output schema, the description conveys both the operation and the conceptual return (last-fired times per conversion event) plus the diagnostic intent. Only minor detail about the result structure is absent.

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?

With schema description coverage at 0% for the single pixel_id parameter, the description is the only source of meaning, and it only implies that a pixel identifier is supplied ('for a pixel'). It adds no format, source, or lookup guidance beyond that implication.

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 (Get) and resource (when each conversion event last fired for a pixel), with scope clear enough to distinguish the pixel variant from the parallel reddit_ads_get_app_last_fired. It does not explicitly name that sibling, so it falls just short of 5.

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 clause 'to check tracking health' supplies a usage context, implying this is a diagnostic tool. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no reference to alternatives, so the guidance remains implied rather than stated.

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