direct_list_creatives

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the appended 'Read-only' is redundant. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the annotations (no pagination behavior, no rate limits, no auth needs).

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?

Extremely compact and front-loaded, with no filler. It reads as a fragment rather than a sentence, but every token is informational and nothing is buried.

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?

An output schema exists, so return fields need not be re-explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. The remaining gap is significant: zero parameter documentation and no usage guidance for a tool with three exposed parameters.

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 all three parameters (ids, limit with default 500, offset), and the description explains none of them. The conventional names make them partially guessable, but the default page size of 500 and the ids filter semantics are left entirely undocumented.

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?

Names the resource (creatives) and enumerates the subtypes it covers (image/HTML5/video/smart), plus the fields returned (Id, Type, Name, size). It is clearly a listing tool, though the verb itself is only implied by the name and there is no differentiation from siblings like direct_list_ad_images or direct_list_ad_videos.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool versus the many other direct_list_* siblings, no prerequisites, and no mention of what ids/limit/offset are for. An agent must infer usage entirely.

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