add_responsive_search_ad

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the input constraints, optionality of path1/path2, and the return value (new ad id). It does not mention permissions or error behavior, but for a creation tool, this is sufficient transparency.

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 two sentences long and front-loaded with the main purpose. Each sentence adds essential information: constraints, optional fields, and return value. There is no wasted 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?

Despite having 7 parameters, the description covers the key non-obvious aspects: constraints, optional fields, and return value. Required parameters like account_id and ad_group_id are self-explanatory from their names. The output schema exists but the description's explicit note about returning the ad id is helpful. It's complete enough for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaningful semantics by explaining validation rules for headlines (3-15, <=30 chars) and descriptions (2-4, <=90 chars), and clarifies that path1/path2 are optional display-url paths. This goes well beyond the bare schema.

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 starts with a specific verb+resource: 'Add a Responsive Search Ad.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like list_ads or add_keywords. The subsequent constraints and return value also reinforce the tool's singular purpose.

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 clearly implies when to use this tool: when creating a Responsive Search Ad. It provides necessary requirements (3-15 headlines, 2-4 descriptions) but doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use it, which is a minor gap. Overall, context is clear.

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