google_ads_schedule_targeting_update

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

No annotations present, but the description discloses mutating behavior, default start_minute/end_minute=ZERO, and reversibility via inverse operations. It also explains the return format. Auth and rate limits are not covered, but overall adequate.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action, then key details. No filler, each 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?

Given 4 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description covers purpose, usage, parameter details, mutation traits, and reversibility. Could mention error conditions or rate limits, but still fairly complete.

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%; descriptions add useful context like obtaining campaign_id via google_ads_campaigns_list and remove_criterion_ids via sibling tool. Default behaviors for start_hour/end_hour are also clarified.

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 tool adds/removes ad-schedule criteria on a campaign, distinguishing from the read-only sibling (google_ads_schedule_targeting_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?

Explicitly mentions the alternative for read-only listing and that at least one of add_schedules/remove_criterion_ids must be provided. Could slightly improve by noting scenarios when this tool is preferred over other schedule tools, but no direct alternatives exist among siblings.

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