google_ads_keywords_add

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

Discloses that the operation is mutating, reversible (with rollback pausing keywords instead of removing), and that duplicates are rejected. With no annotations, the description adequately covers key behavioral traits.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the main action and return value. Each sentence adds distinct value: purpose, return/rollback, duplicate guidance. No wasted words.

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?

For a tool with 3 parameters and no output schema, the description covers the return format, rollback behavior, and duplicate pre-check. This is adequate for selection and invocation, though details like potential errors or rate limits are absent.

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 detailed parameter descriptions. The description adds the return-value format and a quick match-type summary, but does not significantly exceed the schema's own detail, earning the baseline 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 the verb 'adds' and the resource 'keyword criteria to a single ad group', and specifies the return value. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like list, pause, remove, etc.

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 guidance on when to use a sibling tool (google_ads_keywords_cross_adgroup_duplicates) for duplicate checking at scale, and mentions mutability/reversibility via rollback_apply. Does not explicitly state when not to use, but the advice is actionable.

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