forecast_campaign

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, and the description consistently reflects a non-mutating forecasting operation. It adds useful behavioral context beyond annotations by specifying the projected metrics and the validation purpose around budget and bid.

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?

Two efficient sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence front-loads the action and outputs, and the second adds sequencing and purpose. 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?

With an output schema present and annotations covering side effects, the description adequately explains the core purpose, expected metrics, and its role relative to preview_campaign. The main gap is optional parameter semantics, but required parameters are identifiable from the schema and names.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It only references keywords, daily_budget, and max_cpc, leaving customer_id, geo_target_ids, language_ids, match_type, bidding, start_date, and forecast_days semantically unexplained. With 10 parameters and no schema descriptions, this is insufficient.

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?

States a specific verb ('Forecast') and resource ('a campaign'), enumerates concrete outputs (clicks, impressions, cost, CPC, conversions, CPA) and key inputs (keyword set, daily budget, max CPC). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling preview_campaign by explaining it is the step to run beforehand.

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 instructs to 'Run this before preview_campaign' and provides the rationale ('to find out whether the budget and bid actually buy enough traffic to learn anything'). It names an alternative and the sequencing condition, though it does not discuss other alternatives or when not to use it.

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