list_ads

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation via 'List' but does not mention any additional behavioral traits such as pagination, status filters, inclusion of deleted/archived ads, or authorization requirements. The field list adds minimal context beyond the action itself.

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 a single, concise sentence that is front-loaded with the action and scope. It includes the key returned fields without unnecessary elaboration, making it efficient and easily parsed.

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 simplicity of the tool (2 params, no enums, no nested objects) and the presence of an output schema, the description adequately covers the essential purpose and scope. However, it omits any caveats such as whether all ads are returned or if any filtering applies, which could be relevant. The existence of the output schema reduces the need to explain return values, so this is reasonably complete.

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 for missing parameter details. It clarifies that ad_group_id is the scope ('in an ad group'), but does not explain account_id's role or any parameter constraints. This partial clarification adds some meaning beyond the bare parameter titles, but not enough to fully compensate.

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 verb 'List', the resource 'ads', and the scope 'in an ad group', making it distinct from sibling tools like list_ad_groups or list_keywords. It also enumerates the returned fields, removing ambiguity about what data is provided.

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 phrase 'in an ad group' provides clear context that this tool is for listing ads within a specific ad group, implying the need for an ad_group_id. While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, the context is sufficient for an agent to choose this tool when ads are needed.

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