google_ads_recommendations_list

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It explicitly states "Read-only" and details the return shape (array with resource_name, type, impact, campaign_id). It omits pagination/limit behavior, but for a straightforward list tool this is a minor gap.

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?

Dense but efficient. The output format is included because no output schema exists, and every phrase serves a purpose. The description is front-loaded with the core purpose and quickly covers read-only behavior, filters, and the apply alternative in just two sentences.

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 there is no output schema and no annotations, the description covers all essential context: what the tool does, what it returns, that it is read-only, how to filter, and which sibling tool to use for applying. This is sufficient for an agent to select and invoke the tool 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the filtering semantics: campaign_id scopes to one campaign, recommendation_type scopes to one kind. This goes beyond the schema descriptions and clarifies behavioral impact.

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 uses a specific verb ("List") and names the exact resource ("Google's current automated recommendations for the account"). It clearly distinguishes itself from the sibling apply tool by framing this as a read-only list operation and showing the return shape.

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?

It explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool vs. the apply alternative: “To apply a recommendation use google_ads_recommendations_apply with resource_name from this list.” It also explains how to scope via campaign_id or recommendation_type, giving clear guidance.

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