Search Targeting Geolocations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, so the description does not need to reiterate safety. It adds behavioral context by stating it returns 'Location keys to use in ad set targeting', clarifying the read-only, non-destructive nature. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Very concise; uses a single sentence for purpose and bullet-style Args/Returns. Every sentence is informative without redundancy. Front-loaded with the primary action.

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?

Given the 4 parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently explains the return value conceptually ('Location keys to use in ad set targeting'). It covers the required parameter and two optional ones. Could mention response_format behavior but schema handles that.

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 low (25%), but the description compensates by explaining the purpose of 'q' with examples, enumerating values for 'type', and specifying default and max for 'limit'. The undocumented 'response_format' parameter has its description in the schema, so coverage is adequate.

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 it searches for geographic targeting options, listing examples of location types (countries, regions, cities, zip codes). Distinguishes from sibling tools like meta_search_targeting_demographics and meta_search_targeting_interests by specifying 'geographic'.

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 implies usage for geographic targeting in ad sets, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus similar search tools (e.g., for demographics or interests). It provides the return value context but lacks explicit guidance on alternatives or exclusions.

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