google_ads_keywords_cross_adgroup_duplicates

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

The description explicitly states 'Read-only,' which is transparent. It also explains the negative impact of duplicates on quality score, adding behavioral context beyond basic safety. No annotations provided, so this carries full weight.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 no output schema, the description lists exactly what is returned (duplicate groups with metrics and recommendation). For a read-only analysis tool with 3 parameters, this is fully complete.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage, so baseline is 3. The description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema provides, which is acceptable given high coverage.

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 finds duplicate keywords across ad groups, specifies the action 'finds', and differentiates from sibling tools like google_ads_keywords_list or google_ads_keywords_diagnose.

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 advises 'run this before a keyword restructuring sprint,' providing clear context. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternatives, but the guidance is sufficient and actionable.

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