Draft enabling a Reddit entity

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

Beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), the description adds meaningful behavioral context: this is a non-final PREVIEW action, enabling a new ad triggers Reddit policy review (PENDING_APPROVAL), and execution requires a follow-up confirm_and_apply call. This is useful and not redundant with annotations.

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 compact and front-loaded: the core action and scope appear immediately, followed by the policy-review implication and the required follow-up. Every sentence contributes useful information without padding.

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?

The description covers the action, scope, preview nature, policy-review behavior, and the follow-up step. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are not the description's job. The main missing piece is explicit parameter value guidance, but that is captured in parameter semantics.

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It mentions the supported entity types (campaign, ad group, ad) but does not explain entity_id format, accepted entity_type values, or the role of ad_account_id. This is a significant gap.

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 action ('Draft enabling'), the resource (Reddit campaign, ad group, or ad), and the effect (configured_status=ACTIVE). The 'PREVIEW' tag and the Reddit-specific scope distinguish it from generic siblings like enable_entity and pause_reddit_entity.

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 explicitly explains that this is a draft/preview step and instructs the agent to call confirm_and_apply with the returned plan_id to execute. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the Reddit scope and draft semantics are clear enough to route usage.

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