get_ad_account

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It usefully discloses that the account is tied to the API key and that no chaining is needed, but it does not explicitly state read-only behavior, error conditions, or return format. This is adequate but not rich for a tool with no annotation safety profile.

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 sentences with no filler. The core action is front-loaded, followed by concrete use cases and a clear sequencing instruction. 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?

For a one-parameter, read-style metadata call, the description covers purpose, use cases, and call ordering. It names the relevant fields an agent can expect (timezone, currency, review status). The lack of an output schema makes exact return envelope and error details slightly under-specified, but this is acceptable for a simple health-check-like tool.

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 100%, so the schema already documents the optional ad_account_id parameter and the environment variable fallback. The tool description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Get metadata for the ad account associated with the API key.' It also differentiates the tool from siblings like list_ad_accounts and get_oauth_me by making clear this is about the single account tied to the current key, not enumeration or broader identity.

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?

The description explicitly says when to use it: 'Use to verify auth, check timezone/currency/review status.' It also gives strong sequencing guidance with 'call first to confirm key works.' It does not mention specific alternatives to avoid, but the intended context is clear enough.

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