google_ads_network_performance_report

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It fully specifies the output shape (one row per campaign/network), exact field names, the filtering of Display/YouTube/Discover rows, rounding behavior, and read-only status. This is exceptional transparency for a report tool.

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 dense but efficient, with four sentences each serving a distinct purpose: purpose, output shape, filtering/formatting details, and usage guidance. It is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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?

Although there is no output schema, the description thoroughly explains the return shape, filtering, rounding, and read-only nature. For a report tool with optional parameters already documented in the schema, this is complete enough for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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?

All three parameters have schema descriptions covering 100%, so the schema already documents parameter semantics. The description adds overall output context but no param-specific details beyond the schema, matching the baseline of 3.

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 a specific purpose: reporting Google Ads performance split by ad network (Google Search vs. Search Partners). It differentiates itself from sibling reporting tools by explicitly naming alternatives and the unique output format, so an agent can immediately understand what this tool does and how it differs.

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 states when to use this tool: 'Use this to decide whether to toggle Search Partners.' It also names alternative tools for other scenarios ('For overall campaign totals use google_ads_performance_report; for per-ad breakdowns use google_ads_ad_performance_report'), providing clear context and exclusions.

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