list_audiences

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions output fields but omits critical behavior such as default/maximum count, pagination, ordering, or whether 'all' is truly all given the count parameter. The phrase 'List all audiences' is potentially misleading when paired with a limit parameter.

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 one concise sentence that states the action, resource, and output highlights. No wasted words or redundant repetition of the schema.

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 simple list tool, the description plus schema provide reasonable coverage, but the lack of an output schema and the ambiguity around 'all' vs. the count parameter leave gaps. The description doesn't clarify what 'key stats' includes or how results are limited, making it incomplete for an agent needing precise return expectations.

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 single 'count' parameter is fully described in the schema (default 10, max 100), so schema coverage is 100%. The description does not add any additional meaning about the parameter, staying at the baseline for schema-backed clarity.

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 uses a specific verb ('List') and resource ('audiences'), clarifying the scope ('all audiences') and adding detail about output content ('subscriber counts and key stats'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_campaigns.

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 context of when to use this tool is implied—when you need audience lists with statistics—but there are no explicit exclusions or comparisons to alternative tools. No mention of when to prefer search_members or search instead.

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