Search Targeting Demographics

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true. The description adds no further behavioral traits (e.g., pagination, result limit, error handling). It's adequate but doesn't enhance transparency beyond what's structured.

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 brief with a clear arg structure. No wasted words, though the code block could be better integrated. Efficient but minimal.

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?

Given no output schema and high sibling count, the description lacks details about return format or expected output behavior. It's adequate for a search tool but could better describe the results structure.

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 only 25%, so the description should compensate. It only loosely describes 'q' as 'Search query' and lists 'type' values, but provides no details on query syntax, limit behavior, or response_format. Two parameters (limit, response_format) are unaddressed.

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 the tool searches for demographic targeting options and lists examples (job titles, employers, education). While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like meta_search_targeting_interests, the name and examples make the purpose distinct.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context about scenarios where demographics search is appropriate compared to interests or geolocations.

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