x ads list post previews

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond those hints: previews are rendered HTML, native fields and pagination are preserved, and _micro monetary fields are millionths of the account currency. This helps the agent interpret returned data correctly.

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?

Two dense sentences front-load the core purpose and then add valuable behavioral details with no filler. Every phrase earns its place, and key information is presented early.

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?

Annotations and output schema cover safety and return structure, and parameter descriptions are complete. However, the description's scope statement conflicts with the tweet_type enum by excluding DRAFT, which is a notable gap that could lead an agent to believe drafts cannot be previewed.

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 parameters. The description does not meaningfully add per-parameter semantics; the 'published or scheduled' phrasing aligns with tweet_type but is incomplete because it omits DRAFT.

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 action and resource: 'Get rendered HTML previews for published or scheduled posts.' This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and differentiates it from generic post-listing siblings like x_ads_list_promoted_posts. However, it omits the DRAFT tweet_type that the schema accepts, so the stated scope is slightly incomplete.

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 usage: use this tool when rendered HTML previews of posts are needed, as opposed to plain post metadata. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use the tool, leaving sibling selection mostly to inference.

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