google_ads_change_history_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses read-only status, sorting order, the 100-row cap, timestamp format caveats with defensive parsing advice, and the API's rejection of open-ended ranges with mureo's compensating behavior. It also documents the exact return shape, including field names and example enum values.

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 dense single paragraph but every sentence adds necessary information. The return-format explanation, though verbose, is essential since there is no output schema. It is front-loaded with the primary action and includes a clear alternative at the end, balancing detail and brevity.

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 absence of an output schema and annotations, the description fully compensates by specifying return fields, types, and formatting caveats. It covers date behavior, read-only nature, and usage context, while also pointing to a sibling for narrower queries. No critical gaps are apparent.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining why omitted dates default to 14 days and that the API rejects open-ended ranges, which mureo automatically fills. This clarifies the behavior of start_date and end_date parameters in a practical way not captured in 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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List the most recent change_event rows on a Google Ads account', and adds sorting and capping details. It distinguishes from sibling tools by stating 'Use this for audit-trail diagnosis' and explicitly naming an alternative, google_ads_cost_increase_investigate, for narrower filtering.

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 provides clear when-to-use guidance: 'Use this for audit-trail diagnosis' and explicitly points to an alternative for bid/budget-only filtering. It also explains date default behavior ('Defaults to the last 14 days when dates are omitted') and the mureo filling of open-ended ranges, which helps the agent decide when to call this tool.

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