kadam_adv_set_creative_status

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

Annotations only assert idempotentHint, so the description carries the behavioral load and does it well: partial success semantics ('some IDs can be refused while others succeed') and a real precondition ('restored is rejected for the whole call if the creative's campaign is itself archived — restore the campaign first'). It omits auth/permission requirements and any rate-limit context.

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, front-loaded with the core action, then the parameter format, then the two edge cases. No filler; every clause adds operative 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?

For a 2-parameter mutation tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, this covers the essentials an agent needs: bulk invocation format, allowed values, partial-failure behavior, and the archived-campaign blocker for 'restored'.

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 must compensate: it explains that 'ids' is a comma-separated string and that 'status' accepts active/paused/archived/restored, including the non-obvious meaning of 'restored' as take-out-of-archive. That adds genuine meaning beyond the enum list.

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 and resource ('Set status for multiple creatives'), explicitly bulk, which cleanly separates it from siblings like kadam_adv_set_campaign_status and kadam_adv_update_creative (single-creative edit). An agent can pick it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear operative context: comma-separated IDs, the four allowed statuses, and the meaning of 'restored'. It does not explicitly name when to prefer an alternative (e.g., update_creative or set_creative_bids), so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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