meta get adset configuration

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint false, so the 'no mutation' statement is mostly redundant. The description adds useful scope detail about parent campaign budget/objective and account currency, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits such as error behavior, rate limits, or output caveats beyond what the annotations already cover.

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 dense, front-loaded sentence conveys purpose, scope, return type, and safety in around 20 words. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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?

With only two fully documented required parameters, a complete annotation set, and an output schema present, the description supplies the remaining operational context an agent needs: this is a read-before-edit configuration lookup with native settings and no mutation.

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%, and the schema already explains both adSetId and adAccountId with usage guidance such as not substituting a campaign or business ID. The description itself adds no parameter-level meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 names a concrete verb and resource: read an existing ad set plus its parent campaign budget/objective and account currency. It also clarifies the return nature with 'Returns native settings; no mutation,' making it distinct from broader list/read siblings like meta_get_adsets.

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 phrase 'before preparing an edit' gives a clear and specific context for when this tool is appropriate. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the intended use case is obvious enough for selecting this over sibling getters.

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