upload_ad_image

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

No annotations present, so description fully handles behavioral disclosure. Explains two methods for image input (file vs image_url), optional access_token, default name behavior, and details return object structure including image_hash and images list. No mention of destructive actions or limits, but behavior is well-covered.

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?

Description is concise with a one-line summary followed by clearly labeled Args and Returns sections. No extraneous information; every sentence contributes to understanding.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and presence of an output schema (which is compensated by the description's return section), the description is complete. It explains input, output, and ties to other tools (create_ad_creative, get_image_by_hash). No gaps.

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 0%, yet description adds full meaning for each parameter: account_id format 'act_XXXXXXXXX', file as data URL or base64, image_url as direct URL, access_token optional with fallback, name defaults to filename. This compensates fully for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 'Upload an image to use in Meta Ads creatives.' Identifies the specific resource (image) and action (upload), distinguishing it from retrieval tools like get_ad_image and creative-building tools like create_ad_creative.

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?

Provides context on when to use (for ad creatives) and how output image_hash ties into create_ad_creative and get_image_by_hash. Lacks explicit 'when not to use' but implies the tool is for uploading, not for other operations.

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