ad_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is fully carried by structured data. The description adds only the hint that results reflect current state; it says nothing about authentication/profile scoping or failure behavior.

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?

A single short sentence with the verb and scope front-loaded; nothing is wasted, though there is very little substance for the space available.

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 and annotations cover the safety profile, so the description need not explain return values or side effects. The remaining gap is minor: it never clarifies which identifier to supply when both 'id' and 'adId' are present.

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 100%, so the four parameters are already documented, giving the baseline of 3. The description adds no disambiguation between the two identifier parameters (legacy 'id' vs 'adId'), which is the one piece of meaning it could usefully contribute.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Read one ad by ID'), and 'one' plus 'for current-state verification' implicitly separates it from the bulk/snapshot siblings like ads_query and ad_report. It stops short of naming any sibling explicitly.

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?

'For current-state verification' implies the intended context (fetch fresh single-record state rather than a report or list), but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and no alternative tool is named.

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