kadam_adv_bulk_update_bids

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations: it confirms that all campaigns receive the same bid, mentions performance benefits, and highlights validation requirements (rejection of empty country lists, mixing pricing models). Annotations only provide idempotentHint=true, which is consistent.

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 three sentences: purpose, benefit, and crucial constraints. It is front-loaded and every sentence provides unique value. No redundancy or fluff.

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?

For a tool with 4 required parameters and no output schema, the description covers all essential context: purpose, speed benefit, constraints on pricing model and countries. It does not explain return values, but that is minor given the tool's simplicity.

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 100%, but the description adds meaning: clarifies that the bid is uniform across campaigns, explains bid meaning for CPA ('target CPA cost'), and reinforces that pricingModel must match. This adds context beyond the schema.

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 verb ('Update'), resource ('bids for multiple campaigns'), and scope ('at once'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'kadam_adv_update_campaign_bid' by noting it is 'Much faster than updating campaigns one by one'.

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 states important usage constraints: all campaigns must share the same pricing model and countries are required. It also warns about validation errors for mixed models. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for single campaign updates, but the mention of 'faster than updating one by one' implies the alternative.

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