ad_report

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, and idempotentHint, so safety behavior is covered structurally. The description adds only the vague notion of 'bounded' rows and provides no additional context about scoping, limits, or reporting behavior beyond what the annotations and schema already convey.

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 a single front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It is concise, though its brevity borders on under-specification for a nine-parameter reporting tool.

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?

Although the schema and output schema are rich, the description does not explain the tool's place among many sibling report tools or clarify what 'ad performance rows' covers. For a complex, nine-parameter reporting endpoint, this leaves important selection context missing.

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 all nine parameters are documented in the input schema. The description itself adds no parameter-specific meaning, which is acceptable at baseline when 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 states a specific verb and resource: reading ad performance rows. It is clear at a high level, but it does not distinguish this ad-level report from sibling report tools such as campaign_report, ad_group_report, or keyword_report.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus the many sibling reporting tools. The word 'bounded' hints at pagination but does not explain prerequisites, appropriate reporting contexts, or exclusions.

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