search_demographics

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. 'Search' implies a read-only operation, but the description doesn't mention authentication requirements (though meta_access_token parameter hints at this), rate limits, pagination behavior (though page_size and page_cursor parameters exist), or what the search returns. It provides minimal behavioral context beyond the basic operation type.

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, focused sentence with zero wasted words. It's appropriately sized for a search operation and front-loads the essential information. Every word earns its place in this minimal description.

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 that an output schema exists (which should document return values), the description's minimalism is somewhat acceptable. However, for a search tool with 4 parameters and no annotations, the description should provide more context about authentication, pagination behavior, and what constitutes a 'demographic targeting class' to be truly complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for 4 parameters, the description provides no parameter information whatsoever. It doesn't explain what demographic_class represents, how meta_access_token should be obtained or used, or how pagination works with page_size and page_cursor. The description fails to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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 'Search demographic targeting classes' clearly indicates a search operation targeting demographic classes, which is a specific verb+resource combination. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like search_behaviors, search_interests, or search_geo_locations that appear to perform similar search operations for different targeting categories.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There's no mention of prerequisites, when this search is appropriate, or how it differs from other search tools in the sibling list. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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