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

readOnlyHint=true already establishes the safe-read profile, so the description's remaining job is to add context, which it does: it discloses the default sideloading of properties and the computed fields (order count, revenue, balance due). It omits considerations like missing-customer behavior, but for a simple read this is a solid add.

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 tightly packed sentences that front-load the payload description and end with the API mapping. No filler, every clause carries information.

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 takes on the burden of explaining the return and does so at a summary level (order count, revenue, balance due, properties). It stops short of describing the response shape or how the sideloaded data is nested, but is adequate for a single-entity fetch.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3, but the description adds real meaning: it reveals that `properties` is included by default and what those properties contain (addresses, phone, custom fields), which the schema's generic 'comma-separated relationships to sideload' does not convey.

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 (fetch) and resource (one customer), and enumerates the included data (order count, revenue, balance due, sideloaded properties). This clearly separates it from sibling booqable_list_customers and booqable_get_company.

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 by the singular 'one customer' and the required customer_id, but the description never states when to prefer this over booqable_list_customers, booqable_get_order, or the sibling retrieval tools, nor any prerequisites for knowing the customer id.

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