list_segments

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states 'list saved segments' without mentioning that it is a read operation, pagination details, or any constraints. This is insufficient.

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 sentence, making it concise, but it omits critical details like parameter usage and when to apply. Conciseness is not achieved at the expense of completeness.

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?

Given the two parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description should still clarify pagination behavior and the function's read-only nature. It fails to provide enough context for an agent to use the tool 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description does not mention the limit and offset parameters. It provides no explanation of how pagination works, leaving agents without context beyond the schema's basic defaults.

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 'List saved segments -- reusable contact filters for targeted campaigns and automations' clearly defines the tool's purpose, specifying the resource (segments) and context (contact filters for campaigns/automations), effectively distinguishing it from siblings like list_contacts or list_lists.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_segment_contacts or list_lists. The description lacks context for selection among siblings.

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