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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, but the description adds real value: 'sends nothing to anyone and adds no charge,' which explains why it can run without confirmation, plus an explicit auth requirement (Cotlet API key with app access). It doesn't note reversibility or what happens on duplicate names, but coverage is strong for a creation tool.

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 each sentence carries new information (output, safety, prerequisite, auth). The 'runs without asking for your OK' phrasing is slightly colloquial and overlaps the non-destructive annotation, but the text stays tight overall.

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?

With no output schema, the description carries return-value duty and does name the returned key (customer_name). It covers purpose, downstream use, safety, prerequisite, and auth, leaving only minor gaps like duplicate-name behavior.

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 five parameters are already documented in the schema. The description hints at the contact and location fields but adds no syntax, format, or default detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 ('Creates the customer record') plus the shape of what it creates ('New customer with a primary contact and service location'). It also names the downstream siblings that consume the result (create_job, create_estimate), making it easy to distinguish from list or update tools.

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?

Explicit prerequisite is given: 'Search with list_customers first so a repeat customer is not created twice,' naming the exact preventive alternative. It also explains where the output feeds, so the agent knows why and when to call it.

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