meta_ads_ad_sets_create

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the action is mutating and not automatically reversible, suggests rollback logging, specifies the default status and when ACTIVE is appropriate, and notes prerequisites (campaign must exist). This is comprehensive for a creation 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 concise with four well-structured sentences. It front-loads the core purpose, then covers mutability, targeting, status, and next steps without redundancy. 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?

Given the tool's complexity (9 parameters, nested objects, no output schema), the description is fairly complete. It covers creation, return value, mutability, rollback, targeting essentials, status handling, and follow-up step. Lacks mention of rate limits or error handling, but these are acceptable omissions for a creation 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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that targeting requires at minimum geo_locations and age bounds, details the default status and its sign-off condition, and clarifies the bidding scenarios. It reiterates some schema info but provides essential context.

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 it creates a new ad set within an existing campaign and returns the ad set ID. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like meta_ads_ad_sets_update and meta_ads_ads_create by specifying the exact action and resource.

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 provides usage guidance: mentions mutability and rollback via mureo_state_action_log_append, states that default status is PAUSED until operator confirmation, and specifies minimum targeting requirements (geo_locations, age bounds). It also directs to use meta_ads_ads_create after creation. However, it doesn't explicitly compare to other meta_ads_ad_sets tools for when to use this vs. update/get/list.

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