google_ads_add_negative_keywords

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It identifies the action as adding negative keywords (a mutation) but does not mention any side effects, limits (e.g., maximum keywords per call), overwriting behavior, or required permissions.

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 and includes a useful example, though it uses a docstring format with 'Args' and 'Returns' which adds some verbosity. Every part serves a purpose, making it efficient.

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 presence of an output schema (true in context), the description does not need to detail return values. However, it lacks information on error handling, rate limits, or prerequisites. For a simple tool, it is adequate but could be more complete given the large number of sibling tools.

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 by specifying that the 'keywords' parameter should be a list of dicts with 'text' and 'match_type' keys, and provides an example. The schema only defines an array of objects with additional properties, lacking structure.

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 action ('Add negative keywords') and the resource ('to an ad group'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'google_ads_add_keywords' (adds positive keywords) and 'google_ads_add_shared_negative_keywords' (adds to shared library).

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 for adding negative keywords but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when not to use it or contrast with sibling tools like 'google_ads_add_keywords' or 'google_ads_add_shared_negative_keywords'.

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