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

Annotations already indicate non-read-only and non-destructive, but the description adds specific mutational effects: 'Creates/updates accounts and applies points, stamps, and credit deltas.' This gives concrete behavior beyond the annotations, though it does not elaborate on idempotency or failure scenarios.

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 two sentences long and front-loads the core action ('Commit a previewed customer import') followed by essential usage and effect details. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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 complex two-phase operation, the description covers the workflow (preview → commit), the required data provenance, and the high-level effects. It does not explain output schema or error handling, but those are not strictly necessary given the structured schema and the tool's focused scope.

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 coverage is 50% with many fields lacking descriptions. The description compensates by clarifying the critical relationship: the rows and sessionId must come from preview_customer_import. This adds semantic meaning that is not fully present in the schema, especially for the rows array.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Commit a previewed customer import' and specifies the exact side effects: 'Creates/updates accounts and applies points, stamps, and credit deltas.' It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool preview_customer_import by referencing it explicitly as the source of the data.

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?

The description provides a clear prerequisite: 'Pass the same rows and sessionId returned by preview_customer_import.' This tells the agent when this tool is appropriate (after a preview) and what to pass. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternative tools, but the context is strong enough.

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