google_ads_monitoring_delivery_goal

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

The description details the return structure (status field with three values and conditions for each, suggested_workflow, issues, etc.) and declares the tool as read-only. With no annotations provided, this is thorough, though it could mention lack of rate limits or side effects.

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 a single dense paragraph that front-loads the purpose, then details return structure, status conditions, and sibling tools. Every sentence is informative, 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?

The description explains the return structure and status logic thoroughly. Without an output schema, it compensates by detailing the expected format. It could mention potential errors or prerequisites, but overall it is complete for an agent to understand the tool's behavior.

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 input schema already has 100% description coverage for both parameters. The description adds value by suggesting how to obtain the campaign_id ('Obtain via google_ads_campaigns_list'), providing useful context beyond the schema.

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's purpose: checking whether a Google Ads campaign is actively delivering yesterday by composing campaign info, delivery diagnostics, and performance. It distinguishes from siblings by naming alternatives for raw diagnostics and CPA evaluation.

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 explicitly names two alternative tools for different use cases (google_ads_campaigns_diagnose for raw diagnostics, google_ads_monitoring_cpa_goal for CPA-target evaluation), providing clear guidance on when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it.

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