update_audience

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

With no annotations, description discloses mutation behavior, rate limits (max 10 concurrent), authentication, and read-only/dry-run mode support. Also notes lack of retroactive effect. Missing idempotency or error handling details, but covers essential traits.

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 brief intro, bullet-pointed notes, then parameter descriptions with constraints. Front-loaded key information, no wasted words. Ideal length for agent consumption.

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 six parameters, mutation behavior, and output schema, description covers purpose, side effects, authentication, rate limits, parameter constraints, and return format. References sibling tool for checking state. Almost no gaps.

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%, but description provides detailed meaning for each parameter: list_id format and source, name purpose, from_name max chars, from_email verification requirement, subject max chars, permission_reminder regulatory note. Adds significant value beyond schema structure.

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 it updates audience-level settings, listing specific fields (name, default sender, subject, permission reminder). The verb 'update' and resource 'audience' are precise, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like get_audience_details (read) and update_campaign (different resource).

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 clear guidance: changes apply only to new campaigns, no retroactive effect, only provided fields updated, and recommends using get_audience_details to check current settings. Also mentions authentication and rate limits. Could explicitly state when not to use, but context is sufficient.

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