List business pixels

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds nothing beyond that: no note on pagination, result merging, or what a 'business pixel' record contains, even though the schema exposes pagination controls.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is economical, though the extreme brevity borders on under-specification rather than optimal structure.

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 four-parameter, paginated list tool with no output schema and no documentation of the required business_id, this one-sentence description leaves the agent without return-shape, pagination, or scoping detail. It should do more given the structured fields do not cover everything.

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 75%, so most parameters are documented inline (max_pages, page_size, page_token). The description contributes almost nothing beyond implying business_id identifies the business, and the required business_id has no schema description, so it remains under-explained.

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?

States a specific verb (list) and resource (Reddit pixels) plus a scope qualifier ('of a business'), which separates it from the generic sibling reddit_ads_list_pixels. It does not explicitly name that sibling or explain the distinction, so it stops short of a 5.

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 only usage signal is the implicit 'of a business' scoping; there is no statement of when to choose this over reddit_ads_list_pixels or the other pixel tools (get_pixel_last_fired, create_pixel_data_deletion_job). No prerequisites or exclusions are given.

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