google_ads_get_customer_match_status

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses what the tool returns (upload status, match rate, list sizes) and includes an advisory on timing. However, it does not mention any side effects, permissions needed, or that it's read-only (which is implied by 'Get').

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 moderately concise with clear sections (intro, usage tip, args, returns, example). It is front-loaded with the core purpose. Could be slightly trimmed but overall well-structured.

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?

The output schema is present (has output schema: true), so the description's mention of return values (upload status, match rate, list sizes) is sufficient. The tool is simple and the description covers all key aspects for a status check.

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 (only titles). The description adds meaning: customer_id format (no hyphens) and user_list_id as the list to check. The Args section explicitly explains parameters, surpassing schema-only information.

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's purpose: 'Get Customer Match upload status, match rate, and list size.' It uses specific verbs and resource, and distinguishes itself from sibling tools (like upload or list tools) by being a read-only status check.

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 provides timing guidance ('Check this 24-48 hours after uploading') and a minimum threshold ('minimum 1,000'), which helps the agent decide when to invoke. It lacks explicit when-not scenarios but the context is clear.

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