ad_manager_google_get_audiences

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond what the name implies. The annotations declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, which already cover safety, but the description provides no additional context such as what data is returned, potential pagination, or any side effects. It relies entirely on the structured fields.

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 a single short sentence, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. While it is front-loaded and lacks fluff, it omits essential details about the tool's scope or behavior, making it insufficiently sized for the agent to understand its utility.

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?

Even with a simple input schema and no output schema, the description fails to explain what 'audiences' encompasses, the return format, or any filtering capabilities. Given the existence of a sibling tool for fetching a single audience, it's unclear if this returns all audiences or a filtered set, leaving the agent without enough context to use it correctly.

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 input schema already provides a clear description for locationId (including its default), so with 100% schema description coverage, the baseline is 3. The tool description adds nothing about the parameter, so it does not enhance the schema's meaning, but it also doesn't need to given the schema's completeness.

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 'Get audiences' is a near-verbatim restatement of the tool name and provides no additional detail about what 'audiences' refers to (e.g., custom audiences, remarketing lists) or whether it returns a list. It does not differentiate this tool from the sibling ad_manager_google_get_audience_by_id, so the purpose is vague and ambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ad_manager_google_get_audience_by_id, ad_manager_fb_get_custom_audiences, or other ad platform tools. The description offers no context about selection criteria, prerequisites, or situations where this tool is preferred.

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