ghl_ad_fb_audience_update

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, indicating safe, repeatable updates. The description adds the endpoint path, version, and OAuth scopes (adPublishing.write) but does not clarify partial vs. full replacement or error behavior. No contradiction with annotations.

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 short (three lines) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, the first sentence ('Update custom audience') is redundant with the tool's name, slightly reducing conciseness. Overall, every line serves a purpose.

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 tool has no output schema, and the description does not hint at the response format (e.g., updated audience object). For a state-changing operation, this missing information reduces completeness, though annotations partially compensate with idempotentHint.

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?

Input schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all parameters (audienceId, body with locationId, name, description). The description only restates that name and description can be updated, adding no new semantic meaning beyond the schema.

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 verb 'Update' and the resource 'custom audience', and specifies which fields can be updated ('name or description'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like audience_get, audience_delete, and audience_member_ operations, as it is the only update-specific audience tool.

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 explains what the tool does but does not provide explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives (e.g., member add/remove tools). Usage is implied by the resource name, but no exclusions or comparisons are given, leaving the agent to infer context.

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