google_ads_negative_keywords_add

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

Discloses mutation, reversibility via rollback_apply, and that it returns created criterion_ids. No annotations exist, so description carries the burden; it covers key aspects but could mention duplicate handling or permissions.

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 concise sentences plus a clear note; no extraneous information, perfectly front-loaded.

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?

For a 3-param tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description is fairly complete: purpose, scope, return, reversibility, and alternative. Could mention error handling or idempotency, but overall sufficient.

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 covers all parameters with descriptions. The description adds context about safest match type but does not significantly augment beyond schema, achieving baseline for 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 it adds campaign-level negative keywords that apply to all ad groups, and distinguishes from the sibling tool for ad-group-level negatives.

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 tells when to use the sibling tool instead and warns about over-blocking with campaign-level negatives, providing clear directional guidance.

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