set_account_url_options

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false (mutation). The description adds that changes are account-wide and inherited, only touched fields are modified, and suggests a workflow to read before writing. This goes beyond basic mutation disclosure.

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?

Four sentences: first defines purpose and scope, second explains use case with alternatives, third clarifies partial update, fourth advises workflow. No wasted words; each sentence 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?

Given 4 optional parameters, 100% schema coverage, and an output schema (not shown but present), the description covers purpose, usage, behavior, and workflow. It is complete for an agent to understand and invoke the tool correctly.

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 covers 4 parameters with 100% description, including defaults and clearing behavior. The description groups parameters (tracking template, Final URL suffix, msclkid, parallel tracking) and adds context that only passed fields change, complementing the 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 the tool 'sets account-level URL options/tracking template' and specifies it applies 'account-wide; every campaign inherits them.' It contrasts with editing individual campaigns/ad groups, distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_account_url_options and get_effective_url_settings.

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?

Explicitly advises reading current values first with get_account_url_options and using get_effective_url_settings to confirm. States 'the cleanest way' to apply settings across the whole account instead of per-campaign/ad/keyword, and clarifies that only passed fields change.

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