google_ads_get_keyword_performance

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden. It signals a read-only operation via 'Get' and names the underlying resource, which is useful. However, it does not disclose output units (e.g., cost in micros), pagination behavior, date-range handling, or ordering, leaving meaningful behavioral gaps.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no filler. Every sentence adds useful information about what the tool does and returns.

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?

The tool has no output schema and no annotations, so the description is the only source for return behavior. It lists the main metrics but leaves unspecified units, default date-range semantics, sorting, and how results relate to Google Ads reporting conventions. This is workable for a simple query tool but has clear gaps.

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 describes customerId, startDate, and endDate, covering 75% of parameters. The description adds no extra parameter meaning and does not explain the 'limit' parameter, which relies on its default/min/max in the schema. Overall, it is adequate but not enhanced.

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?

States a specific action ('Get'), the data source ('keyword_view resource'), and the content (quality score, impressions, clicks, cost), so an agent understands what the tool returns. It does not explicitly differentiate among the large set of sibling Google Ads tools, so it stops short of a 5.

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 use when keyword-level performance data is needed, but it gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over related siblings such as google_ads_get_search_terms, google_ads_run_gaql, or google_ads_generate_keyword_historical_metrics. No exclusions or alternative routing are provided.

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