list_dv360_partners

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, openWorld and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds one genuinely useful behavioral fact — a hard cap of 200 results per page — but says nothing about how pagination continuation works or what the account parameter scopes.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and the page cap; nothing is padded. The brevity borders on under-specification, but as a conciseness measure it is efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return-value explanation is rightly omitted, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a four-parameter tool with zero schema documentation, leaving `account` and `page_token` semantics entirely unstated means an agent must guess at scoping and pagination.

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% across 4 parameters, so the description must carry the load. It only partially does: it implies the `filter` parameter is a native DV360 expression and that results are capped at 200 per page, but `account` and `page_token` get no explanation and `page_size` isn't related to the 200 cap.

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?

"Discover DV360 partners" names a specific verb and resource, and the partner entity is distinguishable from the sibling list_dv360_advertisers/campaigns/etc. tools. It falls short of a 5 because 'Discover' is an unusual verb for what siblings call 'list' and no explicit sibling differentiation is offered.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many other DV360 list tools, nor any prerequisite (e.g. that an advertiser or partner context may be required). 'Optional native DV360 filter' hints at input style but gives no exclusion or alternative routing.

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