get_creative_details

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Get detailed information' without describing side effects, required permissions, rate limits, pagination, or what 'detailed information' includes. The read-only nature is not explicitly stated.

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 extremely concise, with a clear first sentence stating the purpose and a structured Args list. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy or 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 get-by-ID tool, the description covers the basic purpose and parameters, and an output schema exists so return values need not be explained. However, it lacks usage guidance and behavioral transparency, making it only minimally complete for an agent to confidently select and invoke the 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?

The schema coverage is 0%, and the description's Args section provides basic meaning for both parameters (Meta Ads creative ID, optional access token). This adds some context beyond the schema types, but it lacks format details or how the access token is used, so it does not fully compensate for the low schema coverage.

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 the specific verb 'Get' and the resource 'ad creative by its ID', which clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like get_ad_creatives (likely listing) and update_ad_creative (modification). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 usage for a single creative by ID but provides no explicit comparison to alternatives such as get_ad_creatives or guidance on when not to use this tool. There is no mention of exclusions or alternative tools, so the context is only implied.

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