add_negative_locations

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

Description reveals it is a two-step draft-and-apply process with a preview, going beyond annotations (non-destructive, non-read-only). It clarifies no immediate action, which is valuable.

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?

Three sentences with no fluff: purpose, usage context, parameter hint and next action. Front-loaded and efficient.

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 3 parameters and presence of output schema, description adequately covers workflow, parameter semantics, and usage. No gaps.

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 has 0% description coverage. Description adds meaning for 'geo_target_ids' as 'numeric Google geo target constant IDs', but does not elaborate on 'campaign_id' or 'customer_id'. Provides partial compensation.

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?

Description states 'Draft negative geo location additions' with specific verb-resource pair and mentions returning a preview. It differentiates from sibling tools like 'add_negative_keywords' by focusing on geo locations.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use this to exclude cities/regions from a campaign while keeping broader positive targets', providing context. Also tells to call 'confirm_and_apply' for execution, but lacks explicit when-not-to-use.

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