creative_delete_preview

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=true, so the safety profile is covered; the description adds real value by stating the deletion is irreversible and by flagging the unreferenced-only precondition, which is not encoded anywhere in structured fields. It stops short of explaining the preview→apply handoff, which would have fully closed the loop.

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; the irreversible and unreferenced qualifiers arrive before anything else.

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 values needn't be explained, and annotations cover the safety profile. However, for a destructive preview tool the description is silent on the confirmation workflow (that nothing is deleted yet and how the deletion is actually committed) and on the failure mode when the creative is still referenced, leaving a meaningful gap.

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 coverage is 75% with concise descriptions for profile, adAccountId, and expectedText, so the schema carries most of the burden. The description adds nothing about how any parameter is used, notably why expectedText is required as a confirmation guard — a natural baseline 3.

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 a specific verb (preview deletion) and resource (creative) with scope qualifiers (one, unreferenced, irreversible), which separates it from creative_create_preview/creative_update_preview and from ad_delete_preview. It does not explicitly contrast with siblings, but the resource noun plus 'preview' framing makes selection unambiguous.

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?

The word 'unreferenced' implies a precondition — the creative must not be in use — but this is left implicit. There is no statement of when to choose this over creative_get, nor any indication that the preview must be followed by a separate apply/execution step.

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