meta_ads_creatives_create_collection

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the operation is 'Mutating — not automatically reversible' and advises recording before-state with mureo_state_action_log_append. It also surfaces the prerequisite of a product catalog, giving the agent essential behavioral and safety context.

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: purpose, mutability/rollback, and alternative. It is front-loaded with the action, contains no redundant information, and 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 the tool's complexity (mutating, catalog-dependent, 7 params) and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, prerequisites, side effects, rollback recommendation, and alternative tool. It also clearly states the return is the new creative id, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke and interpret the result.

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?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all parameters, so the description doesn't need to add param-level detail. The description only mentions product_ids in the context of the catalog requirement, which is already covered in the schema's product_ids description. Baseline 3 applies because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 Collection AdCreative that pulls products from a catalog into a mobile-optimized storefront layout' and notes it returns the new creative id. It distinguishes this from sibling tools by explicitly contrasting with carousel for 'static card decks', making the purpose unmistakable.

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 usage guidance: it requires a product catalog and directs users to set it up via meta_ads.catalogs.* tools first, and for non-catalog static decks it recommends meta_ads_creatives_create_carousel instead. This clearly states when to use this tool versus an alternative.

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