list_audiences

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

With no annotations, the description fully covers behavior: authentication via API key, max 10 concurrent requests, read-only safe to retry. It also describes the return format and pagination behavior, providing complete transparency.

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 remarkably concise and well-structured: purpose, usage, auth/limits, parameter details, return format. Each sentence serves a purpose 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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 parameters) and presence of output schema, the description is complete. It includes parameter details, return field explanations, and behavioral context, leaving no gaps for an agent to misinterpret.

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?

The description explains both parameters beyond the schema: count with range (1-1000) and note that most accounts have fewer than 10, offset as pagination offset to use when exceeding count. This adds significant semantic value since schema coverage is 0%.

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 clearly states the tool lists audiences with subscriber counts and engagement rates. It explicitly distinguishes from siblings like get_audience_details and search_members, establishing its role as the first step to discover list_id values.

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 explicit guidance: it is the first step in most workflows, and alternatives (get_audience_details for full stats, search_members to find members) are specified. Also notes it is read-only and safe to retry, helping the agent decide when to use it.

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