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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'gets' information, implying a read-only operation, but does not explicitly confirm no side effects, disclose permission requirements, or mention any limits (e.g., rate limiting, data freshness). The behavior is under-specified.

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, clear sentence with no extraneous words. It is front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it could be slightly more structured (e.g., bullet points for output fields) without losing conciseness.

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 the lack of output schema, the description partially fills the gap by mentioning 'health score' and 'portfolio.' However, it does not list all possible fields or return format, nor does it describe error conditions or pagination. For a simple get tool, it is adequate but not comprehensive.

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 already fully describes the single parameter 'customer_id' with 100% coverage. The description adds no additional meaning or constraints (e.g., format, examples, or expected behavior when invalid ID is given). Baseline score of 3 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 uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('customer information') and clearly indicates the scope ('including health score and portfolio'). It distinguishes this tool from sibling tools like 'list_customers' (list vs. single) and 'update_customer' (read vs. write).

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 when to use this tool (to retrieve detailed info on one customer) but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternative tools (e.g., 'list_customers' for overview, 'get_budget_health' for financial details). No usage context or prerequisites are provided.

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