list_audiences

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Adds 'Authenticated via API key. Max 10 concurrent requests. Read-only, safe to retry.' Covers auth, rate limits, and safety. Could mention pagination behavior more explicitly but already addresses offset.

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?

Well-structured with sections: purpose, usage, behavioral notes, args, returns. Every sentence is informative. Slightly verbose in upfront phrases but overall efficient.

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?

Complete for a simple list tool. Covers all necessary aspects: parameters, return format (total_items, audiences array with fields), typical usage context. Output schema exists and complements description.

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%, so description must compensate. It clearly explains both parameters: count (1-1000, default 10, typical account has fewer than 10) and offset (pagination offset, use when total_items exceeds count). Adds significant meaning beyond schema.

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 'List audiences (lists) with subscriber counts and engagement rates,' specifying the verb 'list' and the resource 'audiences.' It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_audience_details and search_members.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: 'First step in most workflows to discover list_id values. Use get_audience_details for full stats of a known audience. Use search_members to find a specific member.'

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