Create mediation group

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

Annotations indicate destructive hint, and the description adds behavioral context about the dryRun parameter, including the confirmation flow. However, it does not disclose potential side effects or irreversible changes beyond what annotations imply.

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 extremely concise at two sentences, front-loaded with the purpose, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

For a creation tool with 6 parameters and nested objects, the description covers key structural guidance but lacks explanation of return values, prerequisites (e.g., access requirements), or side effects for a destructive operation. Output schema is missing, and the description does not address this gap.

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 meaning for dryRun (validation mode), targeting and mediationGroupLines (supply as objects following schema), and publisherId (format/defaults). With 67% schema coverage, these additions compensate well, though some parameters like displayName lack extra context.

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 'Create a mediation group' with the API version and allowlist status, specifying the verb and resource. It differentiates from siblings like 'admob_update_mediation_group' but could be more explicit about the overall function.

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 usage by mentioning the MediationGroup schema and providing parameters, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'admob_update_mediation_group' or when not to use it.

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