google_ads_campaigns_diagnose

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

No annotations provided, but description declares 'Read-only — does not change anything,' and details return structure (ordered list from serving_status, primary_status, etc.) with annotations for each issue. Discloses all relevant behavioral traits for a diagnostic tool.

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: first defines purpose, second details output and usage. No redundant words; every sentence adds value.

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 and no annotations, the description adequately explains the return format (ordered list with fields, descriptions, hints) and usage context. Covers essential behavioral aspects; minor gap is lack of explicit note on pagination or limit, but not critical for diagnostic 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%, and schema descriptions are adequate. Description adds context about customer_id fallback but does not significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond 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 specifies verb 'explains why a campaign is not serving or is under-delivering' with a clear resource (campaign) and output (ordered list of issues). It distinguishes from siblings by noting read-only nature and use case before raw reports.

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 states 'Use this before pulling raw performance reports; it narrows the problem space,' providing clear when-to-use guidance. No explicit when-not-to-use, but context among many siblings gives implicit alternatives.

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