daily_budget_recommendation_dismiss_preview

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=true, and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds only that this is a preview of dismissing a single recommendation, which is useful but largely redundant with the read-only annotation and omits details such as whether it validates eligibility or returns warnings.

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?

It is a single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Brevity is appropriate, though it contributes to the under-specification captured in other dimensions.

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 six-parameter preview tool, the description gives almost no context about the required identifiers or how the optional budget amounts affect the preview. An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained, but the input-side context remains thin.

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 33%, so the description must compensate for undocumented parameters. It only loosely implies recommendationId via 'one daily-budget recommendation' and says nothing about profile, adAccountId, promotedObjectId, appliedAmount, or maximumAmount.

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 names a specific verb ('dismissing'), resource ('daily-budget recommendation'), and scope ('one', 'Preview'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from apply and target-CPA siblings through the resource and action, though it does not explicitly name alternatives.

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?

It does not explain when to use this preview versus the apply preview, the recommendation list, or any actual dismissal path. The only guidance is implied by the word 'Preview'.

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