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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden for behavioral disclosure. It reveals a key trait: the segment is a 'regla de quién entra que se recalcula sola' (self-recalculating rule), which is valuable. However, it doesn't mention potential side effects like overwriting existing segments, required permissions, or error scenarios, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 description is two sentences long, front-loaded with the core purpose ('Crea un segmento'), and adds just enough context to be useful. Every word earns its place, with no redundant filler.

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?

The tool has a nested `definition` object and no output schema or annotations. The description provides the core concept but not enough detail on constructing the definition JSON, what the return value is, or required prerequisites. It is adequate for basic understanding but leaves clear gaps for an AI agent to invoke it confidently.

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 low (33%: only the 'definition' parameter has a description). The tool description helps by explaining the concept of a segment ('quién entra' rule), which clarifies what 'definition' should contain. However, it does not add semantics for 'name' or 'description' parameters, and the definition's JSON structure is only referenced via 'same JSON as the UI'.

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 clearly identifies the tool's function: 'Crea un segmento' (creates a segment) and differentiates it from sibling tools by explaining it's a self-recalculating 'who enters' rule used to segment launches without duplicating lists. This distinguishes it from create_list and create_launch, which are siblings.

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 description provides clear usage context: 'Es lo que se usa para segmentar un lanzamiento sin duplicar listas' (it's what is used to segment a launch without duplicating lists). This implies when to use it, but it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name alternative tools. The guidance is clear but lacks explicit exclusions.

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