list_segmentsRetrieve all contact segments and their parent list associations to map your audience structure.
List all segments with their parent list relationships
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds that the tool returns all segments and includes parent-list relationship data, which is useful, but it does not mention pagination, ordering, or response structure.
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 clear sentence with no wasted words. It front-loads the core action and includes the key differentiator about parent list relationships.
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?
For a zero-parameter, read-only list operation with annotations covering safety, this description is nearly complete. It explains what is returned, though it could be more explicit about the output representation of segment and list relationships.
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 tool accepts zero parameters and the schema is empty, so the schema fully describes invocation needs. With no parameters to document, a baseline of 4 is appropriate and no additional description is needed.
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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'List all segments' and adds a meaningful qualifier 'with their parent list relationships.' This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_email_lists and segment mutation 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 intended use case is clear: when an agent needs all segments and their list relationships, this tool is the choice. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, but the singular purpose and simple scope make the usage context obvious.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.