google_ads_negative_keywords_remove

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

With no annotations, the description covers all behavioral traits: destructive nature, immediate effect on next serving cycle, potential for increased traffic, and reversibility. No contradictions.

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 sentences front-loading the main action, concise and information-dense 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?

Given no output schema and no annotations, the description fully covers scope, effect, return value, and alternatives for unsupported cases. No gaps.

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 description adds minimal extra value. It reinforces that criterion_id comes from google_ads_negative_keywords_list, but otherwise doesn't enhance parameter understanding 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?

Description clearly states it removes a single campaign-level negative keyword and returns the removed criterion_id. It distinguishes from siblings by specifying campaign-level scope and mentioning ad group-level is not supported.

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 warns that the operation is destructive and can increase unwanted traffic, mentions reversibility via rollback_apply, and advises using UI or raising an issue for ad group-level removals.

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