meta_ads_creatives_upload_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the mutating nature (persisted), the one-time fetch behavior, and the return value. However, it omits details like auth scopes or rate limits, which are common in Meta APIs. Still, it adds significant behavioral context beyond a dry description.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds necessary information without redundancy. Highly efficient.

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?

For a simple upload tool with no output schema, the description covers what it does, what it returns, and how it integrates with other tools. No gaps remain for the agent to guess.

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 the description adds value by clarifying that account_id is optional and falls back to credentials, and that image_url must be HTTPS. It also explains the effect of persisting the image. This goes beyond the schema's basic type hints.

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?

Clearly states the tool uploads an image from a public HTTPS URL to Meta Ads account and returns an image_hash for use in creative creation. Distinguishes itself from the sibling tool meta_ads_images_upload_file for local files.

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 says when to use (public URL uploads) and when not to use (local files), naming the alternative tool. Also notes that the image is persisted, which guides the agent on side effects.

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