get_adsets

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. The verb 'List' implies a non-destructive read operation, which is inferred but not confirmed. The description discloses what data is returned but omits behavioral traits such as pagination behavior, result limits, ordering, or data freshness.

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?

Two sentences with zero redundancy. The primary action and returned fields are front-loaded, and the intended use case follows immediately. Every word earns its place.

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?

With no output schema, the description's enumeration of returned fields is valuable and mostly sufficient for a simple listing tool. It covers what the tool returns and why to use it, but it omits pagination and limit behavior, which are relevant for any list-style tool.

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 100%, so the schema fully documents all three parameters including the status_filter enum and ad_account_id format example. The description adds minimal parameter-level value beyond linking campaign_ids to the purpose of finding specific ad set IDs, which matches the baseline-3 expectation.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') with a clear resource ('ad sets for a campaign') and enumerates the returned fields (ID, name, status, budget, optimization goal). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like get_ads and get_campaigns by resource, though it never names a sibling explicitly.

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 second sentence gives a concrete use case: 'Use this to find specific ad set IDs and see what each ad set optimizes for.' This tells the agent when to invoke the tool, but it provides no exclusions or pointers to alternative sibling tools for related tasks.

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