google_ads_budget_efficiency

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

Without annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses read-only nature, sources data from get_performance_report, and notes individual failures treated as zero. Could mention edge cases like no enabled campaigns, but overall sufficient.

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?

Description is a single dense paragraph that front-loads purpose and then details return structure. It is efficient but could be slightly more structured. No wasted sentences.

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 no output schema, the description provides the full return structure inline, including complex nested objects. It also references data source, failure behavior, and sibling tools. Very complete for a 2-param tool.

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 description adds meaningful guidance: for 'period' it suggests usage scenarios (e.g., LAST_7_DAYS for recent changes), and for 'customer_id' it explains fallback to credentials. This exceeds the schema descriptions.

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?

Description clearly states the tool scores budget allocation efficiency across all ENABLED campaigns. It distinguishes from siblings like google_ads_budget_reallocation and google_ads_budget_update by specifying their distinct purposes.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool vs alternatives: 'For a concrete DECREASE/INCREASE reallocation plan use google_ads_budget_reallocation; to change a single budget use google_ads_budget_update.' Also clarifies it is read-only.

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