google_ads_change_history_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses read-only nature, result cap (100), sort order (newest-first), default date range (14 days), and exact return fields with types. This is highly transparent.

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 concise yet comprehensive. It starts with the core purpose and behavior, then explains the return format, then provides read-only annotation, usage guidelines, and an alternative. Every sentence adds necessary information.

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 lack of output schema, the description explicitly lists all return fields with their types and example values. It also covers default behavior, API constraints, and usage context. This is complete for a list 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% with descriptions for each parameter. The description adds value by explaining the default date behavior and the API's rejection of open-ended ranges, which is not present in the schema. Thus it compensates well.

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 the verb 'List', the resource 'change_event rows', and key attributes: 'most recent', 'sorted newest-first', 'capped at 100'. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'google_ads_cost_increase_investigate' by specifying its broader audit-trail purpose.

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 when to use: 'Use this for audit-trail diagnosis.' Provides an alternative: 'For narrower bid/budget-only filtering use google_ads_cost_increase_investigate.' Also explains default date behavior and the API constraint that mureo handles.

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