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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true). The description adds real context beyond them: auto-assignment of the customer number when omitted, that the operation reaches no one, that the record is editable afterward, that no confirmation is required, and that a Cotlet API key with app access is needed.

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?

Purpose is front-loaded and most sentences carry distinct information (required fields, default number, no notification, no confirmation, auth). Slightly padded phrasing ('It reaches no one') keeps it 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?

For a mutation tool with no output schema and full schema coverage, the description supplies the behavioral, reversibility, and auth details an agent needs. It stops short of describing error handling or duplicate-customer behavior, but nothing essential is missing.

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 the schema already documents all seven parameters. The description's mention of the required fields and the optional customer number largely restates the schema, so baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add a customer to the register' / 'Creates a customer') and enumerates the key fields set on creation. It is clearly distinguishable from e-conomic_list_customers and e-conomic_get_customer.

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?

It conveys that the call runs without asking first and that no one is notified, which is implied usage context, but it never says when to prefer this over the read siblings (get_customer/list_customers) or what prerequisites beyond the API key exist. Usage is implied rather than spelled out.

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