ads_integration_plan

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. "Show" implies a read-only informational tool, but the description does not explicitly state that it is non-mutating, what permissions are required, or how results are scoped by provider.

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 definition is a single efficient sentence with the primary purpose front-loaded. The phrase "safe next actions" is slightly vague but still earns its place as an output category.

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?

With no annotations and no output schema, the description must carry more weight. It names the main output categories (readiness, env keys, next actions) but leaves the structure of "adapter readiness" and the format of required keys underspecified for a planning 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?

Schema coverage is 0% and the single provider parameter has no schema description. The description compensates partially by clarifying that the parameter selects one provider or all when omitted, but it does not specify accepted provider values or format.

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 (Show) and specific content (adapter readiness, required environment keys, safe next actions), with scope for one or all providers. It is clear but does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like ads_integration_list or ads_module_plan.

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 phrase "for one or all providers" implies usage scope, and "safe next actions" hints at setup planning. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use guidance or alternatives to sibling tools such as ads_integration_list or ads_platform_guide.

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