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

Beyond the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations, the description discloses the return format (list of { id, name, description }) and explicitly notes that it does NOT include a contacts count. It also mentions the prerequisite of a connected Salesforce integration, adding behavioral context not captured by annotations.

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 well-structured with clear sections (PREREQUISITE, WHEN TO USE, PARAMETERS, RETURNS) and is front-loaded with the core purpose. Every sentence contributes value, and there is no redundant or filler content.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter, the description covers all necessary context: prerequisite, usage guidance, parameter meaning, return format, and a notable absence (no contacts count). Since there is no output schema, the description fully explains what the agent can expect, making it complete for correct invocation.

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?

The only parameter 'qualified' is already fully described in the input schema with identical wording. The description's PARAMETERS section repeats this but adds no new meaning or usage nuance beyond the schema. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 states the verb 'List' and the resource 'the account's saved Salesforce mixed criteria', and explains its purpose as the selectable source for creating a Salesforce-contacts audience. This differentiates it from sibling tools like create_salesforce_contacts_audience, which creates an audience rather than listing criteria.

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 explicitly specifies when to use the tool: before create_salesforce_contacts_audience to find the criteria_id, and provides example user queries. It also states a prerequisite (Salesforce integration must be connected) and instructs the agent to guide the user to connect via connect_crm if not, leaving no ambiguity about the correct usage context.

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