Draft a Reddit ad group

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

Annotations only report readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds meaningful behavioral details beyond that: 'created PAUSED,' 'returns a PREVIEW,' and 'Budgets are checked against max_daily_budget.' It does not mention the draft/confirm workflow explicitly, but the draft+PREVIEW phrasing and sibling 'confirm_and_apply' imply it.

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 long but well-organized: a one-line summary, a required-parameters block, then labeled sections for schedule and locations. It avoids fluff and front-loads the most critical behavioral fact, so the structure supports quick scanning despite the length.

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 tool's complexity (25 parameters, 0% schema coverage) and minimal annotations, the description covers the main workflow well but leaves notable gaps: optional targeting parameters, expand_targeting, excluded targeting lists, and the confirmation step are not mentioned. The output schema exists, so return values are covered elsewhere, but an agent still lacks full guidance for valid values of several optional fields.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates substantially for key parameters: it lists allowed values for bid_strategy, bid_type, and optimization_goal, explains the schedule object format with examples, and clarifies the required targeting lists. However, several optional parameters (gender, languages, platforms, expand_targeting, excluded_*) are not described at all, so it is not fully compensating.

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 opening sentence, 'Draft a new Reddit ad group (created PAUSED) — returns a PREVIEW,' uses a specific verb and resource and adds key behavioral qualifiers. It clearly distinguishes this from non-Reddit or non-ad-group draft tools by naming 'Reddit ad group' 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 description provides clear usage context by listing required parameters ('campaign_id, ad_group_name, conversion_pixel_id'), the need for at least one targeting list, and conditional requirements for non-CBO campaigns. It gives practical when-to-use guidance, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or state 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.