Retrieves a specific audience segment by its ID from the documented authoritative list. Use for fetching segment details in Yandex Direct advertising.
Read one segment by filtering the documented authoritative segment list.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| segment_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.7.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and openWorld, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds only a hint that retrieval is a filter over the authoritative segment list, implying a deterministic read with no side effects, but discloses nothing about behavior on missing/invalid ids or result shape.
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?
A single short sentence with the action and scope front-loaded; nothing is padded. The phrasing 'documented authoritative segment list' is slightly redundant, keeping it just short of a 5.
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?
An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and annotations cover the safety profile. The gap is provenance of the id and the sibling relationship to audience_list_segments, which the description leaves unaddressed for a lookup tool.
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?
One parameter with 0% schema description coverage and no enum, so the schema gives only a name and integer type. The description does not explain where segment_id comes from, its expected form, or its relationship to the ids returned by audience_list_segments, leaving the parameter effectively undocumented.
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?
States a specific verb (Read) and resource (one segment), scoped to a single item, which implicitly distinguishes it from audience_list_segments. The trailing phrase about 'filtering the documented authoritative segment list' is odd but does not obscure the core purpose.
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?
No explicit when-to-use, when-not, or named alternative. The agent must infer that this is the single-item counterpart to audience_list_segments; nothing states that segment_id must come from that list, nor what happens when the id is unknown.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.