List audiences

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

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so safety is covered. The description adds the meaningful behavioral fact that audiences under 100 matched people are unusable, but says nothing about pagination or how max_results (default 200) affects results. Modest added value over 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?

Three short, front-loaded statements: what it lists, what the filter means, and the eligibility threshold. No filler, though the formatting as a bare parameter note is slightly awkward.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values needn't be explained, and for a simple read-only list operation the description covers scope, filter semantics and a key eligibility constraint. The remaining gap is pagination/limit behavior for max_results.

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 0%, so the description must carry parameter meaning. It explains the two ownership_type values (OWNED vs RECEIVED/shared with this account), which is genuine value, but leaves max_results and ad_account_id (including the null default meaning all accounts?) completely unaddressed.

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 and enumerates the audience subtypes returned (customer list, visitor, engagement, actalike, persona), which is real information beyond the title. It does not explicitly differentiate itself from close siblings such as pinterest_ads_get_audience or pinterest_ads_list_customer_lists, so it stops short of a 5.

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 implies usage through the ownership_type filter values and the '100 matched people' eligibility note, giving the agent context about what will and won't be returned. It never says when to prefer this over pinterest_ads_get_audience or pinterest_ads_list_customer_lists, and gives no exclusions.

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