meta_ads_ad_sets_enable

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool sets status to ACTIVE, requires the parent campaign to be ACTIVE, does not affect ad-level status, returns ad_set_id and new status, and is reversible. It doesn't cover error handling or permissions, but covers key behavioral aspects.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main action, includes conditions, side effects, return, and reversibility. No unnecessary words; every sentence serves a purpose.

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 covers return values (ad_set_id and new status), prerequisites, and side effects. It also ties in sibling tools for reversibility. It could be improved by noting potential error states or permission requirements, but overall it's fairly complete for a simple enable 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?

Input schema has 100% coverage, so the description adds minimal value beyond schema. Account_id fallback is already in schema, ad_set_id is self-explanatory. The description indirectly clarifies parameters through behavioral context but does not provide new parameter-specific semantics.

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 resumes a paused ad set by setting its status to ACTIVE, distinguishing it from siblings like meta_ads_ad_sets_pause and meta_ads_ad_sets_update. It includes conditions about the parent campaign and ads underneath, leaving no ambiguity about the action.

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 context on when to use (to resume a paused ad set) and mentions a prerequisite (parent campaign must be ACTIVE). It also notes that ads remain PAUSED and that the operation is reversible via rollback_apply or pause. However, it could be more explicit about not using if the campaign is inactive.

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