list_audiences

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It only states that the tool lists audiences, with no disclosure about pagination, ordering, filtering, authentication needs, rate limits, or any side effects. This is insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's behavior.

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 a single, concise sentence that delivers the essential information without any redundant or unnecessary 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?

The description is adequate for a simple list-all tool with no parameters and no output schema, but it lacks details about the return format (e.g., list of audience IDs, names, or objects), any ordering, or potential limitations (e.g., maximum return size). Given the tool's simplicity, it meets the minimum but could be more helpful.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so parameter documentation is not needed. The description does not add any parameter meaning, but since there are no parameters, a baseline of 4 is appropriate.

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 action ('List'), the resource ('saved audiences'), and the context ('in this workspace'). It also defines what audiences are ('named sets of channels'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_audience (creation) and suggest_audiences (suggestion).

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 implies the tool is used to list all saved audiences but provides no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives like suggest_audiences or list_channels. No 'when not to use' or alternative tool mentions are present.

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