Search Meta Ad Interests

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds context on how the results are used (in targeting.flexible_spec) and provides the return structure, including fields like id, name, audience_size. This adds value beyond annotations.

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 concise: two sentences plus a parameter list and return structure. It is front-loaded with the main purpose. Every sentence adds value, with no redundant or extraneous text.

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 annotations and schema, the description is quite complete. It explains the output format and usage. However, it does not mention pagination or error handling, which could be useful but are not critical for a simple search tool. Overall, it provides sufficient context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

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 description adds significant meaning beyond the input schema: it provides examples for the 'q' parameter ('baseball', 'cooking', 'travel') and specifies the default value for 'limit' (25). The schema only provides type and constraints; the description enriches understanding.

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 the tool searches Meta's interest targeting catalog by keyword. It specifies the exact resource (interest catalog) and action (search). The tool name and description differentiate it from sibling tools like meta_ads_search_behaviors and meta_ads_search_demographics, which search other targeting catalogs.

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 explicitly states the output is suitable for use in an ad set's targeting.flexible_spec, indicating context. However, it does not provide explicit guidance on when not to use this tool versus alternatives, though the sibling tools' names imply differentiation.

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