google_ads_negative_keywords_remove

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

Discloses destructive nature ('exclusion is lifted immediately, can increase unwanted traffic') and reversibility via rollback_apply. No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Lacks mention of auth requirements or rate limits, but sufficient for a simple removal.

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 concise sentences: purpose+return, destructive warning, ad-group note. Every sentence adds value with no fluff. Front-loaded with the main action.

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?

Covers key aspects: return value, destructive behavior, reversibility, and limitation for ad-group. No output schema but return value mentioned. Missing details on error handling or prerequisites, but sufficient for a simple removal tool.

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% with good parameter descriptions. The description adds no new meaning to parameters beyond schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate. Does not elaborate on parameter usage.

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?

Clearly states the action ('Removes a single campaign-level negative keyword'), specifies the level (campaign-level), and distinguishes from ad-group level. Mentions return value (criterion_id). Differentiates from sibling tools like negative_keywords_add, negative_keywords_list.

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?

Implies use for campaign-level removal, explicitly notes ad-group absence and alternative (UI or raise issue). Mentions reversal via rollback_apply. Could be more explicit about when to use vs alternatives, but provides good context.

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