target_cpa_suggestions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond the name—it does not explain what a 'suggestion' is, whether campaign context is required, or how results should be interpreted.

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 one-sentence description is concise but under-specified rather than appropriately sized. It is front-loaded with the verb, yet it omits essential context that would make this sentence earn its place.

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?

This is a complex tool with nine parameters, nested filter/sorting/time-range objects, and an output schema. The description supplies none of the operational context an agent needs—what suggestions represent, how they relate to siblings, or what input combinations are meaningful—beyond the bare action phrase.

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 (including profile, adAccountId, filters, timeRange, etc.) are fully documented in the schema. The description adds nothing about parameter usage, but the baseline is 3 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 verb and resource ('Get target CPA suggestions'), but it does not differentiate this tool from closely named siblings like target_cpa_recommendations or target_cpa_recommendation_apply_preview. An agent can infer it retrieves suggestions, but not how it differs from recommendation-related tools.

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 alternatives such as target_cpa_recommendations or target_cpa_recommendation_apply_preview. No preconditions, exclusions, or selection criteria are provided.

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