ghl_ad_li_integration_create

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

The description adds behavioral details beyond annotations, including the endpoint URL, API version, and required OAuth scope 'adPublishing.write'. This helps an agent understand authentication and versioning requirements.

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 somewhat repetitive (first line duplicates title) and includes technical details that are useful but could be more concisely formatted. It is not overly long but has redundancy.

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 creation tool with no output schema, the description should explain what is returned (e.g., integration ID) or error handling. It only covers input and endpoint, missing important output context.

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?

Since the input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions and examples, the description adds no additional semantic information beyond stating that the body is from the OpenAPI spec.

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 (Create), resource (LinkedIn Ads integration), and scope (for a location with ad account details). It distinguishes from sibling tools like integration_get.

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 does not provide when to use this tool vs. alternatives. It lacks explicit usage context, prerequisites, or conditions for use.

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