get_audience_insights

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only restates the tool's purpose without disclosing any behavioral details such as whether it is read-only, what data it includes, or how it aggregates insights. The verb 'Get' implies a read operation, but no safety or side-effect context is given.

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 that is easy to parse. It is appropriately concise for a simple get operation, though it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description is too minimal. It does not clarify what 'performance insights' actually contain, how the parameters interact, or what kind of response to expect. This leaves the agent under-informed for a tool that should surface metric data.

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%: both customerId and audienceId have descriptions. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already documents the parameters clearly, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 audience performance insights' names a clear verb and resource, but 'insights' is vague and does not specify what kind of performance data is returned. It does not distinguish this tool from siblings like get_audiences or get_auction_insights, which could also be seen as related reporting tools.

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 is no mention of prerequisites, typical use cases, or situations where a sibling tool would be more appropriate.

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