google_ads_assign_bidding_strategy

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It states the action is an assignment that replaces the current strategy, but lacks details on side effects, permissions, reversibility, or error conditions. This is insufficient for a mutation tool.

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: a clear first sentence, followed by an args list and example. 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?

Given the simple 3-parameter signature and no annotations, the description covers purpose, inputs, and output (success message). It is largely complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly, though it could include prerequisites.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, but the tool description lists each parameter with a short explanation (e.g., 'customer_id: Customer ID (without hyphens)'). This adds basic meaning, but does not provide constraints or where to obtain IDs.

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 assigns a portfolio bidding strategy to a campaign. The verb 'assign' and the specific resource 'portfolio bidding strategy' make it distinct from siblings like 'create_bidding_strategy' or 'update_bidding_strategy'.

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 explains that it replaces the current bidding strategy and mentions Google AI optimization across campaigns. While it does not explicitly list alternatives or when not to use, the context is clear enough for an agent to understand its use case.

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