List third-party audiences

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 that results include sizes and costs, which is useful output context given no output schema, but it says nothing about pagination or rate-limit behavior.

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 tight, front-loaded sentence that wastes no words. It is arguably terse for a tool with multiple audience-list siblings, but nothing is redundant.

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 read-only paginated list tool with fully documented params and annotation-covered safety, the essentials are present. However, no output schema exists and the description only gestures at the return shape (sizes and costs) without covering pagination behavior, leaving modest 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?

All three parameters (max_pages, page_size, page_token) have full schema descriptions, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no pagination syntax or format details beyond what the schema already provides, matching the baseline 3 for high coverage.

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 (third-party data audiences), and names concrete providers (LiveRamp, Bombora) plus returned fields (sizes, costs). The word 'third-party' distinguishes it from the many sibling audience tools (custom, saved), though it never names an alternative explicitly.

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?

No when-to-use guidance, no prerequisites, and no routing to the sibling audience lists (reddit_ads_list_custom_audiences, reddit_ads_list_saved_audiences). Usage is only implied by the verb 'List'.

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