Get Meta Ad by ID

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns an object with requested fields, which is minimal additional transparency. No contradictions, but it could mention authentication or rate limits.

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 well-structured with a main sentence, Args, Returns, and Examples. It is concise with no extraneous text, and each section serves a purpose.

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 is simple and the description covers the main functionality. However, it does not specify what default fields are returned if 'fields' is omitted, which would improve completeness.

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by listing common field values (e.g., id, name, status) in the Args section, which goes beyond the schema's parameter descriptions.

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 states 'Retrieve detailed information about a specific Meta ad' with the verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'specific Meta ad'. It distinguishes from sibling tools by focusing on a single ad by ID and provides examples like 'Get details for ad 23843211234567'.

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 provides 'Use when' examples that indicate typical queries, such as 'What creative and status does this ad have?' This gives clear context, but it does not explicitly exclude alternative tools or specify when not to use it, so it's not a 5.

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