ghl_ad_google_campaign_upsert

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is clear. The description adds endpoint details and OAuth scopes, but does not discuss side effects, conflict handling, or rate limits. It provides modest behavioral context beyond annotations.

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 and front-loaded with the core purpose. It includes some technical details (endpoint, version, scopes) that are useful but could be consolidated. Overall, every sentence adds value without fluff.

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 complex input schema with many nested objects and no output schema, the description lacks high-level guidance on how to construct the campaign structure, common required fields, or typical usage patterns. It does not compensate for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the input schema already defines all parameters with descriptions. The description only adds a high-level 'full campaign structure' without enriching parameter semantics. Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 'Upsert Google campaign' and 'Create or update a full Google Ads campaign structure', using a specific verb and resource. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools, the mention of 'full' and the verb 'upsert' imply it is for comprehensive campaign creation/update, distinguishing it from get/publish/reporting tools.

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 implies when to use this tool (to create or update a campaign), but provides no explicit guidance on when not to use it or which alternatives exist. Sibling tools like get, publish, or reporting are not mentioned, leaving the agent to infer from context.

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