google_ads_ads_create_display

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that image paths are local files and mureo uploads them as ImageAssets, that it returns resource_name, id, and asset IDs, and that the operation is mutating but reversible via rollback_apply. However, it does not detail permissions, default ad status, or other failure modes beyond the channel-mismatch.

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 a concise 5-sentence paragraph with no filler. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and progressively adds details about upload behavior, returns, reversibility, sibling alternative, and error condition.

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 complexity (10 parameters, no output schema), the description covers key aspects: purpose, upload mechanism, return values, reversibility, and a specific error. It lacks full output structure details but the listed return fields suffice for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the automatic upload of image files, providing quality recommendations (e.g., '3+ strongly recommended'), and noting the fallback behavior for customer_id, which goes 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 it creates a Responsive Display Ad (RDA) in a DISPLAY campaign's ad group, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool google_ads_ads_create by specifying the campaign type (Search vs Display).

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 instructs when to use this tool versus the alternative (e.g., 'For Search campaigns use google_ads_ads_create') and highlights a prerequisite: the ad group must belong to a DISPLAY campaign, otherwise it fails with a channel-mismatch error.

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