mutations_plan_mutations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds context by specifying 'return an immutable preview' and reinforcing 'makes no Ads write.' This goes slightly beyond the annotations by clarifying the nature of the returned data (immutable preview) rather than just the safety profile.

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 a single sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and directly states the tool's purpose. Every word adds value, and there is no redundancy or filler.

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 output schema and strong annotations, the description adequately conveys the tool's primary role as a non-writing validation/preview step. However, it misses details about partial_failure handling and could benefit from explicit differentiation from the many sibling mutation tools, leaving a slight 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only mentions 'operations' as the subject of validation, leaving customer_id and partial_failure completely unexplained. The description fails to provide essential parameter 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 the tool's function: 'Validate operations and return an immutable preview' and explicitly notes it 'makes no Ads write.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like mutations_apply_mutation_plan, which applies plans, and mutations_get_mutation_plan, which retrieves plans.

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 previewing/validation ('return an immutable preview'; 'makes no Ads write') but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives like mutations_apply_mutation_plan or mutations_get_mutation_plan. No exclusions or explicit alternative references are provided.

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