Create Ad

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=false. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond that, notably that the created ad includes audit status and that the asset URL must already be CDN-hosted. This gives the agent a clearer picture of the creation workflow and expected result.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose and then uses a structured Args/Returns format. It is somewhat repetitive of the input schema, but it is organized, scannable, and avoids irrelevant prose.

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?

The tool has a nested creative object, required subfields, and no output schema, but the description provides a full field list and a concise Returns note mentioning audit status. It does not explicitly mark which creative subfields are required, though the input schema already provides that. Overall, the important preconditions and outcome are covered well enough for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents every parameter. The description mostly restates the same information, though its nested listing of creative fields does help readability. It adds little semantic value beyond the schema, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Create a new ad within an ad set.' It clearly distinguishes this from sibling campaign and ad set creation tools by anchoring it to a parent adSetId, and it mentions the returned audit status, making the tool's purpose 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 gives clear contextual guidance: the ad must belong to an ad set and the asset must be uploaded to the NewsBreak CDN first. It does not explicitly name alternatives like update_ad or get_ads, but the context makes when to use this tool reasonably obvious.

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