google_ads_schedule_targeting_update

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is mutating, new schedules default to start_minute/end_minute=ZERO, reversibility is only via inverse operations, and the return format is described as one entry per operation with adds first then removes.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the main action, and every sentence adds value: purpose, return format, behavioral default, reversibility, prerequisites, and alternative tool. No filler.

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 the rich schema and the description covering return format, prerequisites, and alternatives, the context is largely complete. It could additionally address partial failure behavior or idempotency, but these are minor gaps for a mutate 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 detailed parameter descriptions, so the description does not need to add much. It does reinforce the anyOf constraint (at least one of add_schedules/remove_criterion_ids) and adds the minute default behavior, but otherwise relies on 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?

The description clearly states the tool's function: 'Add and/or remove ad-schedule criteria on a Google Ads campaign in a single mutate.' This specifies the action, resource, and scope, and distinguishes it from the read-only sibling by explicitly naming '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 provides when-to-use guidance, including the prerequisite that at least one of add_schedules/remove_criterion_ids must be provided, and directs users to the read-only alternative: 'For the read-only listing use google_ads_schedule_targeting_list.' It also references source tools for parameter values.

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