List segments

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: the deprecation status, the always-default-profile fallback, and the inability to list segments of any other profile. This directly shapes whether an agent should select or avoid the tool.

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?

Three short paragraphs are front-loaded with the core action, then usage context, then deprecation warning and replacement. Every sentence carries useful information with no filler.

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 parameterless list endpoint with read-only annotations, the description covers what it returns, the key limitation, and the replacement endpoint. It gives an agent enough to decide correctly even without an output schema.

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 zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there is no parameter documentation burden. The description reinforces that the endpoint has no targeting/filtering capability by explicitly stating it cannot target a profile.

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?

Description opens with 'Get a list of all contact segments', a specific verb and resource. It further scopes behavior by stating the endpoint cannot target a profile and always falls back to the client's default profile, distinguishing it from profile-scoped segment listing tools.

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?

Explicitly marked 'Deprecated' and gives the exact replacement endpoint. It clearly states when not to use this tool: when another profile's segments are needed, use GET /api/reach/v1/profiles/{profileUuid}/segmentation/segments instead.

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