google ads get pmax asset diagnostics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about the output categories but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as pagination, rate limits, or conditional availability of metrics/top combinations; no contradiction exists.

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?

One sentence with the action, scope, and return-value summary front-loaded. The enumeration of outputs is compact and every word 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?

Given the annotations, 100% parameter coverage, and an output schema, the description is sufficient for an agent to understand what the tool returns and that it is safe to call. It could add a brief note distinguishing it from get_pmax_assets or get_recommendations, but the core calling context is 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 100%, so the schema already documents all eight parameters. The description repeats 'optional performance metrics' and 'optional top asset combinations' but adds no parameter detail beyond what the schema's per-field descriptions provide, so baseline 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 states a specific resource ('Performance Max asset group diagnostics') and the exact data returned, so an agent can tell this apart from sibling tools like google_ads_get_pmax_assets or google_ads_get_pmax_placements. 'Read-only' plus the enumerated outputs make the operation's scope 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 when to use the tool: whenever diagnostic signals such as ad strength, asset coverage action items, or primary status reasons are needed. However, it does not explicitly say when to prefer this over related PMax tools or mention exclusions, so usage guidance is only implied.

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