get_ad

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states a basic fetch operation and does not mention read-only semantics, error handling (e.g., not found), the effect of the optional 'fields' parameter, or any rate limits. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

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 single, front-loaded sentence that immediately communicates the tool's core purpose. There is no wasted wording or unnecessary detail, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what is returned and any error behavior, but it does not. It also lacks details about the optional 'fields' parameter and how it affects the response. For a simple getter, the description is minimally adequate but not complete.

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 does not compensate. It mentions 'id' in a generic way but does not explain the ID format (numeric pattern), the purpose of the optional 'fields' array, or how the parameters interact. The description adds no meaningful semantic value beyond what the schema already provides.

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 'Fetch a single ad by id' clearly states the action (fetch), resource (a single ad), and scope (by id), distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_ads (plural) or get_ad_image (different resource type). It is specific and unambiguous.

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 description implies usage when a single ad is needed by ID, but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or point to alternatives like get_campaign or list_ads. This is implied usage rather than no guidance, but it lacks clear exclusions or alternative recommendations.

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