kadam_adv_set_audience_params

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

With annotations only supplying readOnlyHint=false, the description carries the disclosure burden and does so well: it states this is a full-replace operation where unset slots are cleared, and that {placeholder}-like values are rejected. Both are non-obvious behaviors an agent would otherwise get wrong.

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 tight sentences with no filler; the destructive replace semantics are front-loaded and the read-first pointer and validation rule follow in priority order. Every sentence carries actionable 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?

For a 6-parameter mutation with no output schema, the description covers the destructive-replace risk, the prerequisite read step, and a validation constraint, which is what an agent needs to call it safely. Return-value detail is unnecessary given there is no 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?

Schema coverage is 67%, with the id and two paramInt descriptions supplied by the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description adds important semantics about the set as a whole (omitted slots are cleared, placeholder values refused) but does not explain what event, paramStr, or paramStr2 individually mean beyond their schema entries.

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 ('Set') and resource ('hardcoded parameters of a pixel or S2S audience'), which cleanly separates it from the read sibling kadam_adv_get_audience_params and from kadam_adv_update_audience. An agent can identify the operation without opening either schema.

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 directs the agent to read current values with kadam_adv_get_audience_params first and clarifies the 'send every value you want to keep' precondition, which is real usage guidance. It stops short of stating when not to use this tool (e.g. versus update_audience or create_audience), so it is clear context rather than full when/when-not routing.

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