Critical gaps across both tools. run_gaql has a basic description but lacks parameter descriptions entirely, the 'query' and 'customer_id' parameters have no guidance on format, constraints, or examples. create_ad_creative has no visible schema or parameter documentation in the provided source. Neither tool documents output schemas. The server lacks error handling guidance, recovery paths, and security documentation. Descriptions are present but minimal (run_gaql: ~120 chars, acceptable; create_ad_creative: ~80 chars, borderline). No tool annotations, no pagination support, no idempotency guarantees. This is a D-grade implementation.

• Add parameter descriptions to run_gaql: 'query' should specify 'Valid GAQL SELECT query (no CREATE/UPDATE/DELETE/MUTATE/REMOVE/INSERT). Example: SELECT campaign.id, campaign.name FROM campaign WHERE campaign.status = ENABLED'; 'customer_id' should specify format and example (e.g., '1234567890' or '123-456-7890').
• Document run_gaql output schema: specify returned fields (e.g., rows array with campaign.id, campaign.name), total_results count, and any pagination support.
• Add complete schema to create_ad_creative: define input parameters (image_url? image_file? dimensions? format?), their types, descriptions, and constraints. Document what the tool returns (asset_id, url, metadata).
• Add error handling guidance: 'If GAQL syntax is invalid, the tool returns a 400 error with the invalid clause. Verify query syntax and retry. If customer_id is not found, returns 404, verify the ID with list_customers().'
• Add tool annotations: mark run_gaql with readOnlyHint=true (SELECT only); mark create_ad_creative with destructiveHint=true (creates assets) and idempotentHint=false (each call creates a new asset).