google_ads_conversions_performance

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

No annotations provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It declares 'Read-only', explains the computation of cost_per_conversion via a separate GAQL due to a limitation, and notes that only rows with conversions > 0 are included. No mention of rate limits or authentication, but the essential behavioral traits are covered.

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 single paragraph that efficiently packs purpose, return structure, a technical note about cost_per_conversion, a read-only statement, and a cross-reference to a sibling tool. It is front-loaded and every sentence serves a purpose.

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 3 optional parameters and no output schema, the description provides a detailed return structure (actions, daily_details, landing_pages) and explains the computed field. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to understand what the tool returns and how it behaves.

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% with each parameter described. The description adds marginal value by providing usage guidance for period values (e.g., LAST_7_DAYS for recent diagnosis), but does not significantly enhance understanding beyond 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 clearly states it reports Google Ads conversions broken down by conversion_action and date, with optional campaign filter. It explicitly distinguishes from the sibling tool google_ads_performance_report by directing users to that tool for campaign-level metrics.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on when to use this tool (for conversion_action and date breakdown) and when not to (use google_ads_performance_report for campaign-level). Also gives hints on period selection for different use cases (e.g., LAST_7_DAYS for recent diagnosis, LAST_90_DAYS for baseline).

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