Get saved audience

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that — no note on auth requirements, whether a missing ID errors, or what the returned audience object contains.

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 single sentence is front-loaded and free of waste, but it is concise at the cost of being under-specified rather than genuinely 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?

No output schema exists and annotations only cover the read-only/open-world nature, so the description should carry the burden of explaining what is returned. For a getter tool keyed on an opaque ID, the definition leaves too much unstated.

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% with one required parameter (saved_audience_id), and the description says nothing about its format, provenance, or how to obtain it (e.g., from list_saved_audiences). It fails to compensate for the undocumented parameter.

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 'Get a saved audience' merely restates the tool name and title without adding scope, distinguishing it from list_saved_audiences, get_custom_audience, or get_structured_post. It is a tautology rather than a specific statement of what is retrieved or how.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like list_saved_audiences (to enumerate) or get_custom_audience (a different audience type). No prerequisites, no exclusions, no context of any kind.

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