google_ads_keywords_remove

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

Discloses soft-delete nature, destructive behavior, reversibility via rollback_apply, and consequences (original quality score and learning lost). Since no annotations exist, the description carries full burden and meets it well, though could mention if any permissions are needed.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then concise details on alternatives and consequences. No redundant information; every sentence adds value.

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 specifies the return value (criterion_id). It covers delete behavior, alternatives, and rollback implications. For a tool with few params and full schema coverage, this is 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?

All parameters are fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds only that criterion_id is returned and references google_ads_keywords_list, which is helpful but not essential. 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?

The description uses specific verbs ('Removes (soft-deletes)') and clearly identifies the resource ('keyword criterion from an ad group'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like google_ads_keywords_pause by noting the alternative for temporary suspension.

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 advises against using for temporary suspension, recommending google_ads_keywords_pause instead. Also explains that rollback_apply can revert but with loss of quality score and learning, providing clear when-to and when-not-to guidance.

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