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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds meaningful context beyond annotations: it states that no organisationId is needed and that the result includes a user profile and quick stats. The phrase 'quick stats' remains somewhat vague, but the added behavioral context is solid.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and lookup keys. The prerequisite note and return summary follow efficiently with no wasted text.

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?

For a simple read-only lookup with fully documented parameters, the description covers what the tool does, the required input shape, a key prerequisite, and the return content. The only notable gap is that it does not route the agent away from the similar sibling LookupCustomer.

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%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds little parameter-specific detail beyond implying the query format, which the schema itself also lists. Baseline 3 is appropriate when the schema carries the parameter semantics.

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 states a specific verb (Find) and resource (customer/user) plus the accepted lookup keys (email, company name, person name). It does not distinguish itself from the sibling LookupCustomer, which likely serves a similar 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?

Usage is implied by the lookup keys, and the note that organisationId is not required gives useful context. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus LookupCustomer or GetMyInfo, and no exclusions are stated.

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