meta_ads_ad_sets_update

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses behavior: partial update, mutation, reversibility, returns updated object, and critical warning that changing targeting replaces the entire spec. No contradictions.

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?

Concise at ~4 sentences, front-loaded with core purpose, then usage guidelines, then critical warnings. No wasted words, every sentence earns its place.

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, it correctly states return value. Covers partial update, reversibility, targeting caveat, status alternatives, budget condition. Highly complete for a 6-param tool with complex nested fields.

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%, but description adds meaningful context: account_id optional with fallback, status enum with usage recommendation, daily_budget constraint (only if campaign not CBO), and targeting replacement warning. Adds significant value beyond 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 verb ('Updates') and resource ('existing ad set'), and mentions partial update. It differentiates from siblings by referencing dedicated pause/enable tools for status-only transitions.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: use pause/enable tools for simple status changes, and mentions rollback via rollback_apply. Clearly tells when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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