ghl_ad_fb_adset_pause

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=false, destructiveHint=false) are consistent with a mutation that is non-destructive and non-idempotent. The description adds endpoint details (POST) and OAuth scopes (adPublishing.write), which provide additional behavioral context. No contradictions.

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 concise (two lines plus endpoint/scopes) and front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value. Minor extra details (endpoint version, source) are useful but not disruptive.

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 simple pause action with full schema coverage and annotations, the description is minimally viable. However, it lacks info on state behavior (e.g., error if already paused, ability to resume) and no output schema is provided, leaving some gaps for a complete understanding.

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?

Input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions and examples. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema—no parameter semantics, formats, or constraints are elaborated. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action: 'Pause an ad set' and 'Pause a running Facebook ad set'. The verb 'pause' combined with the resource 'ad set' makes the purpose unambiguous. Sibling tools include both pause and resume variants, so this tool is distinctly identified.

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 like delete or resume. It does not specify prerequisites (e.g., ad set must be running), exclusions, or context for proper invocation. This lack of usage direction limits the agent's ability to decide correctly.

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