Retrieves a single locally stored advertising project using its project ID, so you can inspect project details before managing campaigns, spend, or analytics.
Get one local advertising project by its id.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| project_id | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. "Get" implies a read, but it says nothing about permissions, behavior on an unknown id (error vs empty), or what a returned project contains.
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?
A single short sentence with zero padding and the key constraint placed correctly. It is efficient but verges on under-specification rather than bloat.
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, no output schema, and an undocumented parameter, the definition leaves the agent guessing about the return shape and failure modes. For a lookup tool that an agent must chain into project_update or analytics, that is a real gap.
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%, so the description must compensate and it barely does — "by its id" only restates the parameter name. It gives no format hint (UUID? numeric string? prefixed id?) for project_id.
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 ("Get") and resource ("local advertising project") and the singular "one" implicitly separates it from ads_project_list. It does not explicitly name the sibling it complements, but the resource/scope 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?
Only an implicit cue — "by its id" suggests you already have an identifier — but there is no stated when-to-use versus ads_project_list, ads_project_update, or ads_project_analytics, and no prerequisites or exclusions.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.