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 fully covered. The description does add one genuinely useful trait not in the annotations: it runs over local WordPress authentication and needs no WooCommerce REST API keys. It says nothing about failure behavior for a nonexistent ID or permission requirements.

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?

Two tight sentences with the core action front-loaded and zero filler. The second sentence about mirroring the upstream method name is mildly incidental but does carry the authentication detail, so it earns its place.

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 two-parameter read-only lookup with full schema coverage and complete annotations, this is close to sufficient. With no output schema, a brief note on what a returned customer record looks like would close the only remaining gap.

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%, including an explicit instruction on site_id to call list_sites first, so the schema carries the parameter burden. The description only echoes "by ID" and adds no format, range, or cross-parameter meaning beyond what is already structured.

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?

"Gets one WooCommerce customer by ID" gives a specific verb plus resource and the singular qualifier distinguishes it in spirit from the plural listing tool. It stops short of explicitly naming wc_get_customers or wc_get_customer_meta, so an agent must infer the boundary from the plural/singular distinction.

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 rather than stated: an agent can deduce this is the single-record lookup when a customer ID is already known. There is no explicit when-not guidance, no mention of the listing alternative, and no note about preferring this over fetching a customer list to find one record.

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