get_audience

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It does disclose the HTTP method GET, indicating a read-only operation, but it does not describe error behavior, authorization needs, or return format. This is adequate for a simple retrieval tool but not richly transparent.

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?

A single sentence with the verb and resource front-loaded, and the endpoint parenthetical adds precise value without padding. Every token earns its place.

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 one-parameter, no-nested-object tool with a complete schema, the description is essentially sufficient: it names the resource, the lookup key, and the HTTP method. Since there is no output schema, a brief note on the return value would make it fully complete, but this is a minor gap.

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 coverage is 100% and the single id parameter is already documented in the input schema. The description adds no new meaning beyond restating that retrieval is by id, so the baseline score of 3 applies.

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 ('Retrieve') and resource ('an audience') and qualifies it by id, which clearly distinguishes it from list_audiences, update_audience, and delete_audience. The inline endpoint GET /audiences/:id reinforces the exact operation.

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 phrase 'by id' implies this is for fetching a single audience when the id is known, but the description does not explicitly name list_audiences as the alternative for fetching all audiences, nor does it provide a when-not-to-use condition. Usage guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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