List audiences with their ad-account links (never member data)

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety is covered. The description adds a genuine data-scope guarantee (member data is never included) and the underlying endpoint path, but says nothing about pagination, result caps, or ordering for a list operation across an open-world system.

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?

One compact sentence with the scope statement front-loaded and no filler. The nested parentheses around the exclusion and the endpoint path make it slightly harder to parse than necessary.

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 simple read-only list tool with annotations and no output schema, the description covers identity and scope but leaves the only parameter and all return-shape expectations (fields per audience, pagination) unexplained. Adequate, not 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?

Schema description coverage is 0% and the description never mentions the single parameter clientId, so its meaning (client/workspace scoping, whether omission means "all clients") is undocumented everywhere. This is the clearest gap in the definition.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ("List audiences") and states the payload scope ("with their ad-account links"), plus an explicit exclusion ("never member data") that separates it from audiences_addMembers/removeMembers/get without reading their schemas. It stops short of naming those siblings, so it is not 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 exclusion "never member data" implies that member-level data lives behind a different tool, but the description never names the alternative or states a positive when-to-use condition. Usage is inferable from the verb rather than spelled out.

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