list_creatives

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

With no annotations, the description discloses return fields (format, review status, preview, landing URL, title/description) and the effect of the with_details parameter. It does not mention pagination or rate limits, but adds sufficient transparency for a read-like 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 front-loaded with the main purpose and well-structured with bullet-point examples and parameter explanations. It is appropriately sized for two parameters, though slightly verbose with example questions.

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 sibling tools and no output schema, the description covers query intent, return fields, and parameter usage. It lacks explicit mention of result format (e.g., list), but overall is sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 adgroup_id as nearly required for filtering to a specific ad group, and with_details as enriching per-creative detail. This adds meaning beyond the schema types and defaults.

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 specifies the tool lists creatives of a specific ad group, detailing return fields (format, review status, preview, landing URL, title/description). It distinguishes from siblings like get_performance_report by stating separate use for performance metrics.

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 explicit example questions for usage and warns that performance data should be retrieved via get_performance_report, offering a clear alternative. This shows when and when not to use the tool.

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