conduyt_set_smart_view_audience

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses admin key requirement, dynamic group membership resolution, and mutual exclusivity of group vs. reps, but omits key mutation behaviors such as overwrite semantics, error conditions, and whether the operation is idempotent.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value. It is dense but efficient, with no wasted words.

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 mutation tool with no annotations or output schema, it covers the essential decision points: what the tool does, the audience options, mutual exclusivity, and constraints. It could mention success/failure behavior, but the core information needed to call it correctly is present.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds meaning beyond the schema by explaining the audience options (everyone/group/reps), the relationship between audience and groupId/memberIds, and that group and reps are mutually exclusive.

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 states a specific resource (SHARED Smart View) and the concept of audience, with clear distinctions between shared and personal views. It does not explicitly differentiate this tool from siblings like conduyt_update_smart_view_dialing, but the purpose is unambiguous.

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?

It implies usage for shared smart views with an admin key and notes that personal views have no audience, but it does not explicitly say when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide clear when-not conditions.

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