List Ad Labels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is well covered. The description adds little behavioral detail beyond the listing operation itself—no pagination, ordering, or 'all labels' semantics—but it does not contradict the 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?

The description is concise and front-loaded: it states the action and scope in the first sentence, adds a brief relevant context sentence, and includes only the necessary argument documentation. No redundant or vague filler.

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 simple read-only list tool with one required parameter, the description provides enough to call it correctly. It lacks details about the exact shape of the returned labels (e.g., id, name) and pagination, but given the strong annotations and minimal parameter set, this is a minor gap.

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?

The Args section documents ad_account_id as 'Ad account ID', which fills the gap left by the schema's missing description for this required parameter. The response_format parameter is already well described in the schema with an enum and default, so the description appropriately does not repeat it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Lists') and resource ('ad labels') scoped to an ad account. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like meta_create_ad_label and other list tools such as meta_list_ads.

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 a clear use case—retrieve ad labels for an ad account—and gives light context ('Labels help organize campaigns, ad sets, and ads'). However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like meta_create_ad_label, or mention any preconditions.

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