pause_keyword

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

The description adds substantial context beyond the annotations: this is a two-phase preview that only takes effect once Apple applies it, spending stops on application, and user approval is required. Annotations already cover destructive/readOnly/idempotent hints, so the added workflow semantics are genuinely incremental, though reversibility (resume_keyword) is not mentioned.

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, with the critical 'PREVIEW ONLY' constraint front-loaded before the effect and the approval gate. Nothing is wasted.

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?

For a destructive mutation with no output schema, the description covers the preview/apply workflow, the spending consequence, and the approval requirement. The main gap is undocumented required parameters and no note on how the pause is later reversed.

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% for both required params, so the description carries the full burden — but it only vaguely implies a keyword ('one keyword') and never addresses campaignId or expected ID formats. An agent gets almost no help on what to supply.

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 ('pause') and resource ('one Apple Ads keyword'), clearly separating it from siblings like pause_campaign and resume_keyword. An agent can pick it correctly without opening any schema.

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?

'PREVIEW ONLY' and 'Apply only with the user's explicit approval' give clear operational context and a gate condition for acting. It stops short of naming the confirmation sibling (confirm_action) that actually applies the command, so the routing is implied rather than explicit.

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