google_ads_negative_keywords_add_to_ad_group

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

No annotations exist, but the description discloses mutability and reversibility via rollback_apply, plus the narrow scope. While permissions and error handling are omitted, the key behavioral traits are covered.

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?

Three efficient sentences: purpose, scope/return, and alternative. Every sentence serves a distinct purpose with no fluff, front-loading the key information.

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?

Lacks output schema, but the description hints at return value (criterion_ids) and acknowledges reversibility. Given the tool's simplicity and rich schema, it is adequately complete, though could mention idempotency.

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 baseline is 3. The description adds value by noting ad group exclusivity ('do not cascade') and keyword length constraints (80 chars/10 words), exceeding the schema's details.

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 ad group-level negative keywords and distinguishes from campaign-level negatives. It also specifies the return of criterion_ids, making the tool's purpose unmistakable.

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 preferring this over google_ads_negative_keywords_add when exclusion applies to a single ad group, providing clear guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling.

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