archive_ad_group

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses that archiving is 'terminal', which suggests irreversibility, but it does not explain what happens to associated ads, whether the action can be undone, or what side effects may occur.

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 extremely short and contains no filler, but it is under-specified rather than efficiently complete. Every word earns its place, yet the brevity sacrifices important behavioral and usage information.

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 mutating, terminal operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description provides only minimal context. An agent still lacks information about consequences, required authorization, and how this differs from pausing or deactivating an ad group.

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 only 50%: ad_group_id is described as 'Ad group ID' but ad_account_id has no description. The tool description does not compensate for the undocumented parameter or clarify whether ad_account_id is optional or how it relates to the archive operation.

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 action (archive) and the resource (ad group), and the parenthetical '(terminal)' hints at the irreversible nature. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like pause_ad_group or activate_ad_group, so it loses a point for lack of sibling differentiation.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to archive an ad group versus using pause_ad_group, activate_ad_group, or other lifecycle tools. The word 'terminal' implies finality but does not explain use cases, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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