ghl_ad_google_integration_create

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

Annotations indicate this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent write operation. The description adds endpoints and OAuth scopes, which provide behavioral context (authentication needed). However, it does not mention side effects (e.g., what gets created or modified) or rate limits. The description adds moderate value 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 with four lines, front-loading the purpose. It includes endpoint and OAuth scopes without unnecessary elaboration. Minor room for improvement in structuring (e.g., bullet points) but efficient overall.

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?

The description provides endpoint and OAuth context, but lacks information about the response or return value (no output schema). For a creation tool, it would be helpful to indicate what the response contains (e.g., integration ID). Given moderate complexity (3 required params, nested object), completeness is adequate but not thorough.

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%; each property (mccId, locationId, adAccountId) has a description in the schema. The tool description does not add any additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides. 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 explicitly states 'Create Google integration' and 'Create a Google Ads integration for a location', providing a clear verb+resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like ghl_ad_google_integration_get by specifying the creation action.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as other integration creation tools (e.g., Facebook) or when prerequisites are required. The description does not include context about appropriate use cases or limitations.

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