get_ad_video

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses the return payload, explains error behaviors (error 100/33 and #10) and the role of account_id in bypassing them, and mentions token caching. It does not explicitly state it is read-only, but the 'get' verb and absence of side effects imply it.

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 well-structured: a one-sentence summary, followed by usage guidance, then a compact args list. No redundancy; every detail earns its place, including the error mitigation note.

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 tool's moderate complexity (4 optional parameters, two alternative lookup paths), the description fully covers the functionality, parameter selection, and error context. The presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return structure, but the description still lists the key return fields.

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%, so the description compensates richly. Each parameter is explained with purpose, examples (account_id format), alternatives (ad_id vs video_id), and optionality (access_token falls back to cached token). This exceeds 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?

The description states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('video details and source URL for a Meta ad video creative'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_ad_image or get_ad_creatives. It precisely names the returned data (source URL, thumbnail URL, metadata).

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?

Explicit guidance is provided on using ad_id vs video_id, including a reference to get_ad_creatives for the video_id path. It strongly recommends account_id with a clear reason (enables advideos edge, avoids specific errors), which is valuable in choosing the right invocation.

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