get_ads

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that access_token is optional and uses a cached token if not provided, and describes fetch_all and pagination cursor behavior. This adds meaningful context beyond the basic 'get ads' operation, though it does not mention rate limits or error handling.

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, with a one-line summary followed by a well-structured list of parameters. Every argument earns its place, especially given the lack of schema descriptions, and the format is easy to scan.

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 7-parameter tool with 0% schema coverage and an output schema present, the description is quite complete: it explains all parameters and key behaviors like pagination and token caching. It omits rate limits and error handling, but given the output schema and the nature of a read-only list operation, this is acceptable.

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 description provides detailed explanations for all 7 parameters in the Args section, compensating for the 0% schema description coverage. It clarifies the account_id format, access_token caching behavior, limit default, filter semantics, pagination cursor, and fetch_all purpose, adding significant meaning beyond the input schema.

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 clearly states 'Get ads for a Meta Ads account with optional filtering,' which identifies the specific verb (get), resource (ads), and scope (Meta Ads account). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_ad_details (single ad) and get_adsets (ad sets), providing a clear purpose.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: retrieving ads with optional filters by campaign, ad set, pagination, and fetch_all. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the filtering and pagination context make usage intuitive.

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