meta_ads_analysis_placements

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

The description explicitly declares the tool as 'Read-only', which is a key behavioral trait. It also mentions that longer windows cost more Graph API quota, providing additional context. However, it does not cover other potential behaviors like rate limits or permission requirements.

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 composed of five concise, front-loaded sentences. Each sentence adds unique value: purpose, output format, read-only nature, usage scenario, and alternative tool reference. No unnecessary words or repetition.

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 lack of an output schema, the description adequately explains return values (rows with spend, conversions, CPA, ctr, recommendation) and the recommendation options. It covers usage context and read-only nature. However, it could mention ordering or pagination for completeness.

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 minor value for the 'period' parameter by noting the cost of longer windows, but for other parameters it merely restates the schema. Overall, it does not significantly enhance 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?

The description clearly states the tool scores delivery efficiency across Meta placements and flags best/worst, using specific verbs and resources. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'meta_ads_insights_breakdown' by focusing on scored recommendations rather than raw numbers.

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 calling this tool when CPA drifts to isolate a problematic placement. It also provides an alternative: for raw numbers, use meta_ads_insights_breakdown with breakdown='placement', offering clear guidance on 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.