list_conversion_pixels

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the scope ('for the ad account') and the key output ('connected pixel IDs', 'pid'), but does not mention pagination, ordering behavior, rate limits, or other response details. The read-only nature is implied by the name 'list'.

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 purpose is front-loaded and the pointer to the downstream tool is direct and economical.

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?

The description is adequate for a simple list tool, covering its purpose and downstream usage. However, without annotations, an output schema, or parameter explanations, it is incomplete for agents needing to paginate or understand ordering/cursor behavior.

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%, yet the description only implicitly explains ad_account_id via 'for the ad account'. The pagination parameters after, before, limit, and order receive no explanation, leaving the agent to guess at cursor semantics and defaults.

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 ('List') and the resource ('conversion pixels and connected pixel IDs') for the ad account. It also distinguishes itself from the sibling list_conversion_events by directing the agent to use its pid output there.

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 phrase 'Use pid from here with list_conversion_events' gives explicit downstream usage guidance and establishes this tool as a prerequisite for another sibling. It does not explicitly state when not to use alternatives, but the relationship is clear enough.

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