google_ads_device_targeting_get

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

No annotations exist, but the description fully details return order, exact field shapes, null behavior for criterion_id, and the non-obvious enabled/bid_modifier=0.0 convention. This goes far beyond basic disclosure and prevents misinterpretation.

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?

Four dense sentences pack purpose, return contract, edge-case semantics, and alternatives with zero filler. The description is front-loaded with 'Get the device targeting state' and every sentence earns its place.

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?

Despite lacking an output schema, the description fully specifies the return shape, ordering, and the mureo convention for enabled=False. Combined with thorough schema descriptions, the tool is completely self-contained for invocation.

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 already covers both campaign_id and customer_id with examples and fallback behavior (100% coverage). The description adds no extra parameter semantics, so a baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states 'Get the device targeting state for a Google Ads campaign' with a specific verb and resource. The description also distinguishes from modification siblings by explicitly naming google_ads_device_targeting_set and google_ads_bid_adjustments_update for changes.

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 'For modifying, use google_ads_device_targeting_set or google_ads_bid_adjustments_update,' providing direct alternatives. The read-only label and campaign-specific scope clarify exactly when to invoke this getter versus other targeting tools.

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