google ads get video upload

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable state-related behavior beyond those annotations: the videoId should be trusted only after state=PROCESSED, and the call does not re-trigger an upload. This is meaningful context for correct use.

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 compact and front-loaded: the first sentence states the action and scope, and the second sentence gives the critical usage caveat. Every sentence contributes useful information with no repetition or filler.

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 rich input schema, full schema coverage, output schema availability, and strong annotations, the description covers the essential behavioral nuance—waiting for state=PROCESSED before using the videoId. Nothing needed for selection or correct invocation is missing.

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 each parameter already carries a meaningful description. The tool description adds only general context about 'selected customer' and 'one Google Ads upload' but does not materially enrich individual parameter meanings beyond the schema.

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 clearly identifies a specific read operation: it reads the processing state and YouTube video ID for one Google Ads upload. It also distinguishes itself from an upload action with 'This is a read; it does not upload again,' but it does not explicitly differentiate among the many similar sibling get/list tools.

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 concrete operational guidance: 'Use only the returned videoId after state=PROCESSED' and clarifies the call has no upload side effect. It provides clear context for when to consume the result, though it does not name alternative tools or explicit exclusion conditions.

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