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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the safety profile is covered by structured data. The description adds only the upstream endpoint (GET /customers) and the filter semantics; it says nothing about pagination limits or result shape, so the additional behavioral context is modest.

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?

A single tight sentence that front-loads the action and the searchable fields, with the endpoint reference trailing. Nothing is padded, though the field enumeration is somewhat redundant with the schema.

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 read-only list tool with a fully documented 8-parameter schema and no output schema, the description covers the purpose and filter surface adequately. It omits any mention of pagination behavior, which is handled entirely by the schema, leaving only a minor 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%, so every parameter, including pageNavigationToken and itemsPerPage, is already fully documented. The description's field list (name, firstName, lastName, emailAddress) merely restates what the searchField enum already provides, adding no syntax or edge-case detail.

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 clear verb and resource ('List or search customers') and enumerates the searchable fields, which separates it in spirit from the singular bookeo_get_customer. It never names a sibling outright, so the differentiation relies on inference rather than an explicit contrast.

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 conveys the tool's optional modes (search vs. plain list, members/non-members, created-since) which implies when to use it, but it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer bookeo_get_customer or bookeo_search_matching_slots, and no prerequisites are stated.

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