google_ads_device_targeting_set

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool is mutating (UPDATE existing, CREATE missing), reversible only by calling again, iterates individually to prevent full abort, and specifies the return format. It lacks mention of permissions or rate limits but covers the main behavioral aspects.

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 well-structured and front-loaded with purpose. Each sentence adds meaningful information. It is slightly verbose but not overly so, with no redundant statements.

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 no output schema, the description includes the return structure. It covers error handling, reversibility, and constraints. The tool's complexity is moderate, and the description provides all necessary context for an agent to use it correctly.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters, but the description adds significant value: customer_id has a fallback explanation, campaign_id is linked to a lookup tool, and enabled_devices details the 1.0/0.0 logic and non-empty requirement. It clarifies semantics beyond what the schema provides.

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 tool's purpose: 'Toggle device delivery on a Google Ads campaign by setting bid_modifier=1.0 on enabled devices and 0.0 on disabled ones.' It specifies the verb (toggle), resource (device delivery on campaign), and outcome (bid modifier values). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like google_ads_bid_adjustments_update, which is noted in the description.

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 usage context: toggling device delivery via bid modifiers of 1.0/0.0. It explicitly contrasts with google_ads_bid_adjustments_update for fine-grained adjustments. It also mentions that enabled_devices must be non-empty and that one failure doesn't abort others. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or mention prerequisites beyond obtaining campaign_id from google_ads_campaigns_list.

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