Get Ad Sets

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

Annotations already establish readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive behavior. The description adds value by stating that the result is a paginated list and that returned ad sets include full details such as targeting and schedule. No side effects are claimed, so there is no contradiction.

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 one-sentence summary is front-loaded and the Args/Returns structure is easy to scan without excessive verbosity. It loses a point because the Args block largely duplicates the schema and contains the misleading 'search' entry.

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 read-only list operation with annotations and a full schema, the description is mostly sufficient: it identifies required account ID, optional filters, pagination defaults, and the shape of the return value. However, the unsupported 'search' parameter is a substantive error, and with no output schema the return description is only a high-level sketch.

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?

The schema already documents all accepted parameters with 100% coverage, so the description's parameter list is largely redundant. More importantly, the description lists a 'search' argument that is not present in the schema, while additionalProperties is false, which could cause an agent to send an invalid request.

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 opening line 'Get all ad sets for an ad account with optional filters' states the exact verb, resource, and scope. This is distinct from siblings such as newsbreak_get_campaigns, newsbreak_get_ads, and create/update tools because the resource and read-only intent are explicit.

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 makes the intended context clear: retrieve all ad sets belonging to a specific ad account, with optional filtering. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say when not to use it, but the resource-specific phrasing is enough to route an agent correctly.

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