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 covered. The description adds that customer profiles include contact details and sites, which is useful return-content context, but it says nothing about pagination, ordering, or the archived option.

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 very short and contains no fluff, but it is a sentence fragment rather than a well-structured statement. It is front-loaded in the sense that there is only one clause.

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 list tool with strong annotations and mostly documented schema parameters, the definition is minimally adequate. However, it does not explain when to use this versus other list tools, how search and archived interact, or that results are paginated.

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 75%, with cursor, search, and archived documented in the schema; only limit lacks a description. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond the schema, so it neither compensates for the missing limit description nor improves on the already-documented parameters.

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 names the resource ('Customer profiles') and some returned fields ('contact details and sites'), but it is a noun phrase without a clear verb such as 'list' or 'retrieve'. It distinguishes itself from create_customer by implication, but does not explicitly differentiate from other list tools like list_jobs or list_invoices.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of filtering or pagination behavior. The agent must infer usage from the tool name alone.

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