google_ads_local_performance

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains that the tool retrieves data without side effects. It details the metrics returned, the optional filtering, and even mentions view-through conversions, providing comprehensive behavioral context.

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?

Well-structured with separate sections for description, args, returns, example, and metrics. Each sentence adds value; the information is front-loaded and easy to scan.

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 description covers all aspects: purpose, parameters, return structure (including metrics list), and an example. Despite having an output schema, the description complements it with detailed metric explanations.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains all three parameters: customer_id (required format), campaign_id (optional filtering), and date_range (enumerated options). Adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema.

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 retrieves performance metrics for local campaigns, listing specific KPIs like impressions, clicks, and conversions. This distinguishes it from broader campaign performance tools among siblings.

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?

Provides an example with typical parameters and explains the purpose, but does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like google_ads_campaign_performance. The context implies local campaign focus, which is sufficient guidance.

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