meta_ads_ad_rules_get

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

States 'Read-only', which is sufficient for a get operation. No annotations provided, so description covers the behavioral aspect adequately. However, it does not explicitly mention absence of side effects or rate limits, but these are typically understood for reads.

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?

Description is concise (2-3 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, and efficiently lists return fields. No wasted words.

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 no output schema, the description details the return fields comprehensively. It covers purpose, usage, parameters, and output, making it fully actionable for a simple get operation.

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 has 100% coverage with descriptions. Description adds value by explaining account_id optionality with fallback to credentials, and that rule_id comes from meta_ads_ad_rules_list, plus provides format examples. This enhances understanding beyond 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?

Description explicitly states it fetches a single automated rule's full detail record including evaluation_spec and execution_spec, and lists returned fields. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like meta_ads_ad_rules_list which only lists rules.

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 advises to call this before meta_ads_ad_rules_update for merging incremental changes, providing clear when-to-use guidance and a direct alternative. Also notes read-only nature.

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