ads_google_ads_report

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden, and it does deliver two real facts: reads go through a pre-configured service-account adapter (an auth dependency the caller must know about) and the tool 'never writes to Google Ads'. It says nothing about rate limits, pagination, empty-result behavior, or what defaults apply when from/to are omitted.

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?

Two tight sentences that lead with the capability and follow with the safety guarantee; nothing is padded. Slight under-specification rather than wordiness is the issue here.

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?

No annotations, no output schema, and 0% parameter documentation mean the description must do more than two sentences. A caller cannot determine the date format for from/to, whether customer_id is mandatory in practice, what fields the report returns, or how it relates to ads_google_ads_sync.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions a single parameter. The four params (from, to, customer_id, login_customer_id) carry names and regex patterns only; an agent gets no explanation that from/to are a date window, their expected format, what happens if omitted, or that login_customer_id is a manager-account header. 'Daily' is the only faint hint.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Read daily Google Ads campaign metrics', with the source adapter named. The platform qualifier ('Google Ads') implicitly separates it from ads_microsoft_ads_report and ads_yandex_direct_report, but it never explicitly contrasts with ads_google_ads_sync, the closest sibling a caller might confuse it with.

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?

No statement of when to use this versus ads_google_ads_sync (which presumably also touches Google Ads) or the other per-platform report tools. The word 'daily' hints at granularity but there is no guidance on required date ranges, prerequisites, or coverage/exclusion conditions.

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