audience.hf.find_segment

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden, but it discloses almost nothing beyond the read-oriented verb 'find'. It does not state permissions, pagination, whether results are limited by default, or what happens when include_raw is set, so important behavioral context is missing.

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?

It is a single short sentence that is front-loaded with the action and resource. The 'Human-friendly:' prefix is somewhat expendable, but overall there is little waste.

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 7-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and only 57% schema description coverage, the description is too sparse. It omits usage guidance, parameter semantics for several arguments, and behavioral details an agent needs to call the tool reliably.

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 description names the filter fields name/type/status, which correspond to name_contains, types, and statuses. But schema description coverage is only 57%, and the description does not explain value formats, supported type/status values, or the roles of limit, account_id, include_raw, and direct_client_login.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('find Audience segments') and names the filter dimensions (name/type/status), so an agent can understand the operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from sibling tools like audience.segments.list or audience.segments.get, and the 'Human-friendly' prefix adds little specificity.

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 gives no when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no explicit contrast with alternatives such as audience.segments.list. It only implies usage through the filter terms, leaving the agent to infer when this wrapper is preferable.

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