campaign_schedule_preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only 'start and end schedule' scoping and does not explain what a preview actually produces (validation errors, diff, confirmation token) or that it does not persist changes.

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 no filler or redundancy. It is efficient, though the brevity reflects under-specification rather than tight writing.

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 5-parameter preview tool in a large preview/apply family, the description omits the apply step, time format expectations, and what the preview verifies. An output schema exists so return shape needn't be explained, but the workflow context is still 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 only 40% (profile and adAccountId documented; id, startTime, endTime bare). The description mentions 'start and end' but gives no format guidance for the nullable time strings, which is the key ambiguity for this tool.

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 ('Preview') and resource ('campaign start and end schedule update'), so an agent can tell it targets campaign schedule fields. It does not distinguish itself from adjacent siblings such as campaign_update_preview or ad_group_schedule_preview, which is the missing fifth point.

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 call this versus campaign_update_preview or ad_group_schedule_preview, and no mention of the preview-then-apply workflow implied by operations_apply. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name.

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