get_audience_growth_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true. Description adds context about ordering (newest first) and return structure (JSON with list_id and history array of months with aggregate ints), which enhances transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Efficiently structured with a brief intro and clear Args/Returns sections. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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?

Covers purpose, parameter details for most parameters, and return structure. Missing mention of the 'account' parameter, but overall sufficient for a read-only historical data tool with existing output schema.

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 0%, so description must compensate. It explains list_id and count with examples, ranges, and defaults, but does not mention the optional 'account' parameter. Adds meaningful detail for 2 of 3 parameters.

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?

Clearly states 'Retrieve monthly growth history for an audience' with specific metrics (subscribes, unsubscribes, cleaned). Distinguishes from sibling get_audience_details by noting it provides historical trends not current totals.

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?

Explicitly says to use get_audience_details instead for current totals, providing clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance. Also specifies the ordering (newest first) and parameter details.

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