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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive/openWorld, but the description adds behavior not in them: only active audiences are returned, and public filters appear conditionally on membershipMode=dynamic. Those two conditional facts materially affect how an agent interprets the result; missing only notes on error/not-found behavior.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its conditional behavior; the id-stability note is a separate, purposeful clause. No filler or repetition of the title beyond the opening line.

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?

A single-parameter read tool with an output schema, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the two non-obvious behaviors (active-only, conditional filters). Only the inactive/not-found case and pagination-free assumptions are left unstated.

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?

Coverage is reported as 0% at the top level, but the nested audienceId property does carry a description. The description adds genuine meaning by framing the id as a 'stable public handle' reusable in GET /leads?audienceId and audience mutations, which tells the agent the value can be persisted and cross-referenced.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Get one audience') with an added scope qualifier that it returns an *active* audience and includes public filters only when membershipMode=dynamic. That distinguishes it from listAudiences/createAudience implied by the id reference, though no sibling is named directly.

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?

Usage is only implied: the required audienceId and the phrase 'one active audience' suggest retrieval by id, but there is no explicit when-to-use, no mention of what happens for inactive/deleted ids, and no guidance versus listAudiences. An agent must infer the selection rule.

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