google_ads_budget_get

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It declares 'Read-only' and lists returned fields, which is sufficient for a read operation. It could mention auth or rate limits, but the described behavior is clear and accurate.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the core purpose, the second adds critical usage context. Perfectly front-loaded.

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 simple read tool with 2 parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It explains what is returned, the read-only nature, and how it relates to the budget update tool. No gaps.

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 value by explaining the customer_id fallback behavior and that 'mureo resolves the attached budget_id internally' for campaign_id, providing context beyond 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?

The description explicitly states the verb 'Fetches' and the resource 'campaign-budget record attached to a campaign', listing specific return fields. It clearly distinguishes itself from sibling tools like google_ads_budget_update and google_ads_budget_create.

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 marks the operation as 'Read-only' and provides a clear usage guideline: 'confirm reference_count before calling google_ads_budget_update, since changes affect all linked campaigns.' This directly helps the agent decide when to use this vs. the update tool.

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