snapchat get targeting options

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

Annotations already carry readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds 'Retains pagination' (partly redundant with the cursor param) and the anti-hallucination warning about inventing category IDs, which is genuinely useful. It says nothing about value volatility or result volume.

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?

Two tight sentences with the purpose front-loaded and the caution last; nothing is padded. Minor deduction because the partial category enumeration adds bulk without covering the full enum.

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?

With a full output schema and rich annotations, the description doesn't need to explain returns, and it correctly emphasizes pre-edit discovery. It still leaves gaps: no differentiation from snapchat_get_targeting/_specs and no hint that some categories require countryCode.

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 coverage is 100%, so all five parameters are documented in the schema itself; baseline is 3. The description's category list maps loosely to the enum but adds no semantics beyond it, and it never mentions the countryCode dependency for regions/metros/postal_codes, which the schema handles instead.

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 and resource ('Discover native targeting values') and enumerates example catalogs, so an agent knows what it returns. However, it does not distinguish itself from close siblings like snapchat_get_targeting and snapchat_get_targeting_specs, and it lists only 6 of the 9 enum categories, leaving metros, postal_codes and age_groups unmentioned.

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?

'Discover native targeting values before editing' implies the right moment to call it, and 'do not invent category IDs' is a useful constraint. But there is no explicit when-not guidance and no mention of the sibling tools it overlaps with, so the agent must infer the routing decision.

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