kadam_adv_reset_extended_bids

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, but the description adds value beyond them: it discloses the non-obvious side effect that blacklisted (action=off) slices are also dropped and begin being bought again, requires confirm=true, and states the bids are not recoverable. This is exactly the irreversibility and side-effect context an agent needs.

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 tightly packed sentences, front-loaded with the core action, side effect, safety requirement, and alternative. No filler; every sentence carries actionable information.

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?

No output schema exists and this is a destructive mutation, so the description carries the burden well: it covers what is destroyed, the blacklist side effect, the confirmation requirement, and irreversibility. An agent has everything needed to call it safely and 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 50% (confirm documented only as const true, campaignIds as comma-separated string). The description explains why confirm=true exists ('the dropped bids are not recoverable'), adding meaning beyond the schema's const constraint, and clarifies campaignIds as 'the listed campaigns'. It stops short of detailing ID formats or the confirm failure mode.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('Drop every per-slice bid ... returning them to the campaign-level bid') and defines the exact scope (listed campaigns, all slices). It is clearly distinguishable from the sibling kadam_adv_update_extended_bids, which is named for the single-slice case.

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?

Names a concrete alternative ('To remove a single slice use kadam_adv_update_extended_bids with action=remove') and gives the condition selecting it. It lacks broader routing guidance among the many other bid-related siblings (bulk_update_bids, update_site_bids), so it is strong but not exhaustive.

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