get_ad_object_changes

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It indicates a comparison between consecutive events but omits details like error handling (e.g., missing prior event), read-only nature, or any side effects. The description is incomplete for safe invocation.

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 a single concise sentence that front-loads the action. It contains no redundant words, but its brevity sacrifices necessary details for completeness.

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 the absence of an output schema, the description should clarify what is returned (e.g., the list of changed attributes). It also fails to explain the roles of directoryId and infrastructureId. The tool has 5 parameters and 4 required, but the description does not provide enough context to understand the overall operation.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with basic descriptions (e.g., 'Path parameter: id'). The tool description adds minimal context by implying that 'id' refers to an ad-object. However, it does not explain the 'wantedValues' parameter or how parameters relate to each other.

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's purpose: retrieving changes of an ad-object between a specified event and its predecessor. The verb 'get' and resource 'ad-object changes' match the tool name, and the scope distinguishes it from siblings like get_ad_object_in_event and list_changed_deviances.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention prerequisites or limitations. For example, it does not address what happens if the given event has no predecessor.

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