reach_listSegmentsV1

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

No annotations are present, so the description bears full responsibility. It indicates a read operation with no side effects, but does not disclose potential limitations such as pagination, ordering, or whether the list includes all segments across workspaces. For a zero-param tool, this is minimally adequate.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is useful and clear. There is no superfluous information.

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?

The tool is simple, with no parameters, no output schema, and low complexity. The description adequately conveys the return type (list of segments) and purpose (organizing contacts). It could mention that it returns all segments without filtering, but that is implied by 'all'. Complete enough for the use case.

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 has no parameters, and the input schema is empty with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional parameter meaning because there are none. Per guidelines, zero-param tools get a baseline of 4.

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 clearly states 'Get a list of all contact segments', which includes a specific verb ('get') and resource ('contact segments'). It is distinct from sibling tools like reach_listContactsV1 or reach_listProfilesV1, which deal with different entities.

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 description does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. No mention of context, when-not-to-use, or comparisons with related tools like reach_listContactsV1.

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