ads_query

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, and openWorld, so the safety profile is fully covered by structured data. The description adds only the vague notion that results are "bounded" and filtering is endpoint-dependent, saying nothing about scope resolution order for the id/adId/campaignId/adGroupId shortcuts or how pagination bounds results.

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 front-loaded sentence with zero filler. It is efficient, though the brevity is partly a symptom of under-specification rather than disciplined compression.

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 13-parameter query tool with shortcut scoping fields, nested filter/sort/timeRange objects, and pagination, one sentence is far too thin, even with an output schema and rich inline parameter docs. The agent is left to infer precedence between id/adId and the campaign/adGroup scope shortcuts, and what "bounded" actually enforces.

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 every parameter is already documented inline and the baseline is 3. The description's "endpoint-specific filters" is consistent with the filters property but provides no additional syntax, precedence, or combination guidance.

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?

"Query bounded ads" gives a verb (query) and a resource (ads), so the purpose is identifiable, but "bounded" is unexplained and the phrasing does not distinguish this from close siblings like ad_report, ad_get, or ad_groups_query. An agent can guess it is a filtered/segmented ad list, but only by inference.

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 versus ad_report, ad_get, or ad_group_report, and no exclusions or prerequisites. "endpoint-specific filters" implies variability but never tells the agent how to choose the right entry point.

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