google_ads_conversions_list

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'Read-only', details the exact return shape with fields and enum values, and notes ordering by numeric id. This gives the agent a clear picture of side effects and output without needing to invoke.

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 uses three sentences, each with distinct purpose: action/scope, return structure, and usage guidance. No filler or redundancy exists; every sentence contributes 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?

Even though there is no output schema, the description specifies the return array fields, types, and example enum strings, covering the output contract. It also addresses ordering, read-only behavior, and usage context, making it fully self-contained for the agent.

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?

The only parameter, customer_id, is fully described in the schema with type, format, and fallback behavior (100% coverage). The tool description adds no additional parameter-specific meaning, so it remains at the baseline score of 3.

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 'List every conversion action configured on the Google Ads customer, ordered by numeric id', specifying a concrete verb, resource, and scope. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the list variant for conversions, as opposed to .get, .create, .update, .remove, or .tag.

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 says 'Use this to discover conversion_action_id values before calling .get, .update, .remove, or .tag' and 'For CV performance metrics use google_ads_conversions_performance', giving both when-to-use and a clear alternative. This directly guides tool selection among conversion-related tools.

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