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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered. The description adds the organization scoping constraint, which is genuinely useful, but says nothing about pagination behavior or result volume beyond what the schema defaults imply.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and scope, with no filler. The second sentence is mildly redundant with the first ('list' already implies returning customers), which keeps it from 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?

This is a simple read-only list tool with a fully documented schema and rich annotations, so the description carries little burden. The only real omission is any statement of what a returned customer contains, acceptable given no output schema and a conventional entity shape.

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 description coverage is 100% and all five parameters carry their own descriptions, defaults and enums, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'optional filtering and sorting' merely gestures at the search and sortBy parameters without adding syntax or interaction detail.

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 gives a specific verb and resource ('List customers') plus a scope qualifier ('for the current organization'), which separates it from org-agnostic listing. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from fetch_customer or the other list_* tools, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance: nothing says to prefer this over fetch_customer for a single record, nor any prerequisite or exclusion. 'Optional filtering and sorting' hints at bulk/search usage but leaves the routing decision to inference.

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