google_ads_keywords_remove

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is destructive, not automatically reversible, performs a soft-delete, returns the removed criterion_id, and warns that re-adding creates a fresh criterion losing quality score and learning. This goes beyond minimal expectations.

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 three sentences, each providing critical information with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary action and result, then adds risk and alternative guidance efficiently.

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 the tool's destructive nature and lack of output schema, the description covers the key elements: what it does, what it returns, how to mitigate risk, and which alternative to use. It is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke 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 schema descriptions cover all parameters at 100%, so the baseline of 3 applies. The description does not add substantial parameter-level meaning beyond referencing that criterion_id comes from google_ads_keywords_list, which is already in the schema. No additional semantics are needed.

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 removes (soft-deletes) a single keyword criterion from an ad group, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like google_ads_keywords_pause and google_ads_keywords_add by clarifying the soft-delete nature and the contrast with pausing.

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?

Explicit when-to-use guidance is provided: it recommends preferring google_ads_keywords_pause for temporary suspension, and advises recording before-state with mureo_state_action_log_append for rollback considerations. This clearly differentiates from alternatives and states when this tool is appropriate.

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