google_ads_keywords_list

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

Describes as read-only and lists return fields. With no annotations, it carries the full burden but adequately discloses read-only behavior and optional scoping. Could mention potential agreement constraint between campaign_id and ad_group_id, but that's covered in parameter descriptions.

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 concise sentences that front-load the action and provide usage guidance. No unnecessary words. Efficient structure.

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 it's a simple read-only list tool with few parameters and no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage, return fields, and alternatives. Complete for the tool's complexity.

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%, so each parameter is documented in schema. Description summarizes usage pattern but doesn't add new semantics beyond schema. 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 it lists keyword criteria in a Google Ads account with optional scoping and filtering. Distinguishes from siblings by noting use for locating criterion_id before pause/remove and pointing to another tool for diagnostics.

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 when to use this tool (to get criterion_id before pause/remove, or audit keyword coverage) and when not to (for quality-score diagnostics, use diagnostics tool). Provides clear alternatives.

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