draft_context_hints

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

Annotations already declare the tool as read-only, non-destructive, idempotent, and not open-world. The description adds 'deterministic' which aligns with idempotentHint. However, it does not explain output behavior or any nuances beyond annotations, so it adds some but limited value.

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 sentence, concise and directly states the purpose. However, it could be structured more clearly (e.g., separating input sources or expected output) without adding much length.

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 output schema and low parameter documentation, the description is too brief. It does not explain what the tool returns, how the inputs combine, or any usage constraints. A more thorough description is needed for a tool with complex output like context hints.

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 only lists parameter names without adding meaning. For 'keywords' which has an empty object type, there is no format or structure guidance. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 verb 'Draft' and the resource 'deterministic context_hints for an ad group'. It lists the input sources. It distinguishes from sibling tools which are read-only retrievals, but could be more explicit about the generation aspect.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Siblings are all get/list/search tools, so the difference is implied but not stated. No 'when not to use' or alternative tool references.

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