meta_list_pixels

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

No annotations provided; description does not disclose behavioral traits beyond the listing action. Missing info on read-only nature, rate limits, authentication requirements, or response format.

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?

Extremely concise, front-loaded with purpose. Single sentence with no unnecessary words. Every part 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 simple tool with one optional param and no output schema, the description covers basic function and purpose. However, lacks details on pagination, errors, or response format, which would be helpful for a listing 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 coverage is 100% with a single parameter described. Description adds value by explaining expected output fields (id, name, last_fired_time) and the tool's purpose, beyond what the schema provides.

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 'List ad pixels / datasets on an ad account' with specific output fields (id, name, last_fired_time) and a use case (spot stale/duplicate pixels). Distinguishes from sibling tools as no other pixel-listing tool exists.

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?

Implies use when needing to list pixels for auditing, but does not explicitly state when not to use or compare to alternatives. No exclusion criteria or prerequisites mentioned.

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